AGM
- Thread starter porkynut
- Start date
If this wasn't important it would be ammusing.
You talk about vendettas and call for what can only be described as a vendetta.
porkynut
New member
I quote what has already been stated elsewhere on the forum.
" As is their democratic right let us not forget. As it is the democratic right of others to vote in favour of the board appointments at the same AGM".
so no Vendetta just our democratic right to change things as opposed to the continual pursuit of one person to keep him from being elected as a director.
" As is their democratic right let us not forget. As it is the democratic right of others to vote in favour of the board appointments at the same AGM".
so no Vendetta just our democratic right to change things as opposed to the continual pursuit of one person to keep him from being elected as a director.
Helen Goff
No.1 Poster
Colin be very careful that you are not being USED (as a mug) by people who arn't willing to speak for themselves and who when it comes down to the crunch will denigh any conversation they have ever had with you. they will feed you rumours and half truths and enjoy watching you getting cross anough to voice your opinions. stirring things up within the club.
my advice is let them do their own dirty work, don't get dragged into arguments that you don't know the full facts about.
i am saying this from my own experience and also seeing it happen time and time again to others. [&o]
my advice is let them do their own dirty work, don't get dragged into arguments that you don't know the full facts about.
i am saying this from my own experience and also seeing it happen time and time again to others. [&o]
porkynut
New member
Helen
I am certainly not being used and have been personally involved in this fiasco for the past year and i certainly know the full facts.
The only reason Stephen is not commenting on this situation is to try and maintain some dignity and avoid lowering himself to the depths some board members can acheive.
Frankly i could not give a monkeys as it needs to be made known publicly, in fact i will probably be the next person receiving the letter.
I suggest if it is of interest, you can contact Stephen 07831 336126 or email stephen@lyciaevents.com and he will let you have all the details first hand.
I am certainly not being used and have been personally involved in this fiasco for the past year and i certainly know the full facts.
The only reason Stephen is not commenting on this situation is to try and maintain some dignity and avoid lowering himself to the depths some board members can acheive.
Frankly i could not give a monkeys as it needs to be made known publicly, in fact i will probably be the next person receiving the letter.
I suggest if it is of interest, you can contact Stephen 07831 336126 or email stephen@lyciaevents.com and he will let you have all the details first hand.
[FONT=Arial"]Hello all,
I know a bit about what has gone on, although probably not the whole story. I do feel that the board of the club are not behaving in the fashion that the members would expect just now.
Stephen, who is mad about motorsport volunteered to run Le Mans 2010. (Not very many people would have put their hands up for that punishing role). The people that went to the PCGB campsite in 2010 reckoned it was broadly a great success and certainly well worth repeating.
This year the new board decided that they didn't like Stephen organising Le Mans and canned it. The main reason they gave was that it over-ran on costs and therefore was a financial risk to the club. From what I have heard the cost over-run was incorrect and 2010 roughly broke even. This did not prevent one director making a number of incorrect statements in Porsche Post that should have been retracted with apologies.
Bad feeling exists on either side because of this and other things that have been said off the record. Stephen (and Colin) are now running Le Mans 2011 independantly from the club. It is not conceivable that the current board would adopt this now as a club event. It shouldn't have gone this way, but fair enough - business requires trust and good working relationships.
However 2 things have happened which leave me very disappointed in the board:
1. For what reason are they suddenly appearing to recommend Travel Destinations as the Le Mans provider? Surely the club should be aloof from recommending any particular company.
2. The board is abusing its power if, because Stephen stands for a board position, they rescind his membership to prevent him standing in that election.
So I will be going to Cirencester for the AGM to voice my disapproval. I hope that others will too.
Greg![[FONT=verdana,geneva"]](/forum/styles/default/pcgb/space.gif ". [FONT=verdana,geneva\"]")
I know a bit about what has gone on, although probably not the whole story. I do feel that the board of the club are not behaving in the fashion that the members would expect just now.
Stephen, who is mad about motorsport volunteered to run Le Mans 2010. (Not very many people would have put their hands up for that punishing role). The people that went to the PCGB campsite in 2010 reckoned it was broadly a great success and certainly well worth repeating.
This year the new board decided that they didn't like Stephen organising Le Mans and canned it. The main reason they gave was that it over-ran on costs and therefore was a financial risk to the club. From what I have heard the cost over-run was incorrect and 2010 roughly broke even. This did not prevent one director making a number of incorrect statements in Porsche Post that should have been retracted with apologies.
Bad feeling exists on either side because of this and other things that have been said off the record. Stephen (and Colin) are now running Le Mans 2011 independantly from the club. It is not conceivable that the current board would adopt this now as a club event. It shouldn't have gone this way, but fair enough - business requires trust and good working relationships.
However 2 things have happened which leave me very disappointed in the board:
1. For what reason are they suddenly appearing to recommend Travel Destinations as the Le Mans provider? Surely the club should be aloof from recommending any particular company.
2. The board is abusing its power if, because Stephen stands for a board position, they rescind his membership to prevent him standing in that election.
So I will be going to Cirencester for the AGM to voice my disapproval. I hope that others will too.
Greg
Helen Goff
No.1 Poster
No i am not at all interested in getting dragged into this argument. as i have said elsewhere i am more than happy to work for the good of the overall club, with whoever get onto the board. there is far more important things to be discussed at the AGM ..like making sure the clubs 50th Anniversary is a huge success that everyone can enjoy.
dereksharpuk
New member
It appears that most of this discontent stems from the Essex Region. Is it a coincidence that the Essex RO is none other than Martyn Molyneaux? A friend of mine.
We all know that Martyn was not re-elected Chairman of the Board following the last AGM. That is the democratic right of our properly elected Board. They decide who they wish to be Chairman, not the members. So the Board behaved properly, though some feel perhaps a little insensitively.
I am not totally privy to why they decided not to re-elect Martyn, but have heard conflicting sides to this story. Whatever, the Board can elect whoever they like and it is stressed that no one was sacked. Martyn subsequently, and quite understandably, decided he did not wish to continue to serve on that Board. I made the same decision many years ago!
I have also heard two sides of the story concerning Le Mans. My only view is that this particular event should have been self-funding as the numbers attending had to be limited. In this age of austerity the Club simply cannot afford to sub events that restrict numbers. I'm told it did not break even and thus cost the Club money. I trust our Board to manage my money wisely. They possibly don't always get it 100% perfect, but they are only human. However, under the Chairmanship of Martyn, and subsequently, our Board has pulled us back from the Brink and we are now solvent again. Well done.
Whatever, could I ask my good friend Martyn to ask his colleagues in Essex to support our car club and not try to destroy it. I for one have always enjoyed PCGB, even when I was getting flack as a director. [
]
We all know that Martyn was not re-elected Chairman of the Board following the last AGM. That is the democratic right of our properly elected Board. They decide who they wish to be Chairman, not the members. So the Board behaved properly, though some feel perhaps a little insensitively.
I am not totally privy to why they decided not to re-elect Martyn, but have heard conflicting sides to this story. Whatever, the Board can elect whoever they like and it is stressed that no one was sacked. Martyn subsequently, and quite understandably, decided he did not wish to continue to serve on that Board. I made the same decision many years ago!
I have also heard two sides of the story concerning Le Mans. My only view is that this particular event should have been self-funding as the numbers attending had to be limited. In this age of austerity the Club simply cannot afford to sub events that restrict numbers. I'm told it did not break even and thus cost the Club money. I trust our Board to manage my money wisely. They possibly don't always get it 100% perfect, but they are only human. However, under the Chairmanship of Martyn, and subsequently, our Board has pulled us back from the Brink and we are now solvent again. Well done.
Whatever, could I ask my good friend Martyn to ask his colleagues in Essex to support our car club and not try to destroy it. I for one have always enjoyed PCGB, even when I was getting flack as a director. [
]
Well said to both Derek and Helen. Both very astute and wise comments from you both.
A similar situation occurred to me in the past with this club. Many years ago I fell into the 'trap' of trying to undermine our then board whose Chairman at the time was Terry Davison, who collectively advised that we needed to invest and buy Cornbury house.
I thought I knew all the facts as they were given to me and I also thought I knew enough to make my own mind up. Little did I know that I knew very little of what had actually gone on and I was led down the proverbial garden path. It's really enlightening to hear both sides of the story if you can remove yourself emotionally. Our motion was defeated and the result is that we have a magnificent club office for us all to enjoy thanks to that board of Directors and Honorary Member Tony Flint.
I accepted the decision of the board and it was ratified by the members present at the SGM(?). It was time to move on and Terry was even gracious enough to suggest I should try for the board myself! Who me "" a board member? A Lancastrian with a broad dialect? After fits of laughter from me I felt he must have had a slate loose. Mmmm .... a few years later I was initially co-opted by Fred Hampton and spent 5 long years on the board enjoying it tremendously! And yes I served with Derek too.
It's a hard job trying to please everyone and manage your time wisely, especially if, like me, you hold down a full time job. None of us are perfect and we do occasionally make the wrong decision and get up peoples nose. It's not intentional by any means and all of us can sometimes be a little sensitive to.
There are 2 sides to every story and I would proceed with caution, as Helen says.
A similar situation occurred to me in the past with this club. Many years ago I fell into the 'trap' of trying to undermine our then board whose Chairman at the time was Terry Davison, who collectively advised that we needed to invest and buy Cornbury house.
I thought I knew all the facts as they were given to me and I also thought I knew enough to make my own mind up. Little did I know that I knew very little of what had actually gone on and I was led down the proverbial garden path. It's really enlightening to hear both sides of the story if you can remove yourself emotionally. Our motion was defeated and the result is that we have a magnificent club office for us all to enjoy thanks to that board of Directors and Honorary Member Tony Flint.
I accepted the decision of the board and it was ratified by the members present at the SGM(?). It was time to move on and Terry was even gracious enough to suggest I should try for the board myself! Who me "" a board member? A Lancastrian with a broad dialect? After fits of laughter from me I felt he must have had a slate loose. Mmmm .... a few years later I was initially co-opted by Fred Hampton and spent 5 long years on the board enjoying it tremendously! And yes I served with Derek too.
It's a hard job trying to please everyone and manage your time wisely, especially if, like me, you hold down a full time job. None of us are perfect and we do occasionally make the wrong decision and get up peoples nose. It's not intentional by any means and all of us can sometimes be a little sensitive to.
There are 2 sides to every story and I would proceed with caution, as Helen says.
Derek, I think the point people have got somewhat "emotional" about is just that - did it break even? The last I heard it had. If so, that old chestnut shouldn't be dragged up as a negative. If not, then fine, I agree it's a disappointment - but where's the evidence? The problem has been the ability of people to state things without full disclosure/supporting facts. I'd like to believe it was a success (I have never seen any accounts for it, so can't form a view) - as I believe it's good for the Club to be involved with events like Le Mans (I know others will disagree with that too). Perhaps if we took the time to try to sign up members there - like they do at Goodwood or shows in the UK - then we would have an interesting comparison to the cost/benefit of these events?
At the end of the day, this is a Car Club, not a bank or (significant) contibutor to to the UK's gdp or social welfare. Let's just enjoy our shared passion for the cars and try to avoid rising to the bait. We all get frustrated with things, the "interweb thingy" (to quote Clarkson) just seems to allow matters to get inflamed.
Hope the AGM goes without too much incident - unfortunately I can't be there as overseas.
porkynut
New member
Mike
This is not necessarily about LE Mans but it does play a key part in the events leading to the attitude of board memers.
Stephen did post some time ago an offer to anyone who wanted a copy of the accounts from the organisers position and several members did request this information. The offer is still open.
What was never made available is the clubs version, although i do have a paper copy and would suggest the same request should be made to the finance director for the clubs version.
Derek
Just to correct you on the point about restricting numbers to events particularly Le Mans. There was no restriction on the numbers, in fact we have access to over 30,000 M2 of field which would accomodate 600 pitches or over 1200 members and indeed still have that availibilty if anyone is interested.
As for the discontent stemming from Essex region there is no intention to try and destroy the club and i can assure you that it is not being driven by Martyn and his own experiences but is just coincidental that they are both members in the Essex region however there is very large support from several other regions also.
I am sure if you were being singled out by certain board members your region would be the first to support you.
This is not necessarily about LE Mans but it does play a key part in the events leading to the attitude of board memers.
Stephen did post some time ago an offer to anyone who wanted a copy of the accounts from the organisers position and several members did request this information. The offer is still open.
What was never made available is the clubs version, although i do have a paper copy and would suggest the same request should be made to the finance director for the clubs version.
Derek
Just to correct you on the point about restricting numbers to events particularly Le Mans. There was no restriction on the numbers, in fact we have access to over 30,000 M2 of field which would accomodate 600 pitches or over 1200 members and indeed still have that availibilty if anyone is interested.
As for the discontent stemming from Essex region there is no intention to try and destroy the club and i can assure you that it is not being driven by Martyn and his own experiences but is just coincidental that they are both members in the Essex region however there is very large support from several other regions also.
I am sure if you were being singled out by certain board members your region would be the first to support you.
dereksharpuk
New member
Aaah, I don't really want to bandy words with you, but you are wrong on both counts. [
]1. There is a restriction on numbers at Le Mans. We have 15000 members, yet you say Le Mans can only accommodate 1200, less than 10% of the Club. So why should the other 90% subsidise the 10%? Yes, I'm sure the event was a roaring sucess and everyone had a super time. But I stand by what I said; the event should be self funding.
2. Your last comment is interesting: I was singled out by certain board members & no, my region did not support me. Why not? Because I am a big boy and fight my own battles. More importantly, this is a car club and thus I got on with the more important aspects of my life; at the time a divorce and the Gulf War! [
]Finally, I note your comment: and it will be sad when i do not renew my membership next year. . Well that as may be, but surely if you are leaving the Club, why go to all this trouble to stir it up? Your opinion would have far more weight if you were staying.
pauljmcnulty
New member
derek, did you read my numerous attempts to get the full le mans accounts from stephen? It took a while, but as i read the accounts there was no cost to members who didn't go.
If anyone has been suggesting this again they need to back it up with facts.
If anyone has been suggesting this again they need to back it up with facts.
dereksharpuk
New member
Well I am told there was a cost to the Club, hence cost to those who did not go. I can only go on what I am told. Like most, I have not seen any accounts.
porkiegirl
New member
Hi Derek
That's the problem too many people are going by what they are told rather than the facts. Can I suggest that you ask for a copy of the accounts before making further comments, I am sure Stephen will provide them. And to save you looking me up I am Stephen's wife and I worked with him on Le Mans to include the budget as did Colin. And there was me thinking you where a facts man! Mmmmm
Joy
That's the problem too many people are going by what they are told rather than the facts. Can I suggest that you ask for a copy of the accounts before making further comments, I am sure Stephen will provide them. And to save you looking me up I am Stephen's wife and I worked with him on Le Mans to include the budget as did Colin. And there was me thinking you where a facts man! Mmmmm
Joy
dereksharpuk
New member
Joy, we all know that accounts can be manipulated to show anything you want. Moreover, I am told that the Club is still in dispute over certain bills outstanding over Le Mans. Hence the current accounts may not accurately reflect the final costings
Whether that is true or not, I have no idea and care even less. Suffice to say that a set on unaudited figures supplied to me by email count for little.
So forgive me if I pass on this one.
Whether that is true or not, I have no idea and care even less. Suffice to say that a set on unaudited figures supplied to me by email count for little.
So forgive me if I pass on this one.
porkynut
New member
Likewise Derek i do not want to trade points but ref
1. there is a limit on every single event the club runs and likewise they should all be self funding, in fact how many true club organised events actually wipe their face.
2. If members feel incensed the way their fellow members are being treated then why shouldn't they support them.
I can likewise concur with getting prioties in the correct order.
As for my resignation its a bit like the communications director who announced his intention to resign way back last year but he still carried on with the job in hand, however if things do change i may stay a member if i havent also been thrown out.
There is no intention to stir things up just see fair play for someone who has done nothing wrong other than challenge peoples actions.
Hi All
I have been following this most unfortunate state of affairs and have held back from making any comment as I do not have all of the facts to make a fair judgement.
However, when the Club is involved with the provision of an event or the presence at an event such as LeMans there is always a financial risk as nobody can predict how it will turn out financially.
This has always been the case. but we must always remember that `ALL` Club Members are eligable to attend, but the restriction will be on a first come first served basis.
I have been involved in several of the main events that the Club has run, such as Althorp, Highclere,Eynsham Hall, Porsche Parade and the 356 International. these evnts have been open to all Members (except the 356 International) and have depended on support from the Members. It is not until the event is over that you know whether you have made a profit, a loss or broken even.
I feel that it is the job of the Club to arrange as much for the Members as possible , and it is up to the Members to support the hard work of all involved. If the event breaks even or even better makes a profit then we are all happy. If it makes a loss then we should look to see how this can be improved, not just cancel it.
As Chairman I asked in PP if anybody would volunteer to run a site at LeMans as Club Members were asking for support at this event. Bob Lovelace came forward and ran the event very well for several years (not always at a profit ) and the Club felt that it was a "MEMBER BENEFIT" and continued to support the event for Members.
I personally feel that it is very sad that this current state of affairs exists.
Come on Chaps,for goodness sake stop arguing, shake hands and get on HAVING FUN.
Have fun
Paul Kelley
I have been following this most unfortunate state of affairs and have held back from making any comment as I do not have all of the facts to make a fair judgement.
However, when the Club is involved with the provision of an event or the presence at an event such as LeMans there is always a financial risk as nobody can predict how it will turn out financially.
This has always been the case. but we must always remember that `ALL` Club Members are eligable to attend, but the restriction will be on a first come first served basis.
I have been involved in several of the main events that the Club has run, such as Althorp, Highclere,Eynsham Hall, Porsche Parade and the 356 International. these evnts have been open to all Members (except the 356 International) and have depended on support from the Members. It is not until the event is over that you know whether you have made a profit, a loss or broken even.
I feel that it is the job of the Club to arrange as much for the Members as possible , and it is up to the Members to support the hard work of all involved. If the event breaks even or even better makes a profit then we are all happy. If it makes a loss then we should look to see how this can be improved, not just cancel it.
As Chairman I asked in PP if anybody would volunteer to run a site at LeMans as Club Members were asking for support at this event. Bob Lovelace came forward and ran the event very well for several years (not always at a profit ) and the Club felt that it was a "MEMBER BENEFIT" and continued to support the event for Members.
I personally feel that it is very sad that this current state of affairs exists.
Come on Chaps,for goodness sake stop arguing, shake hands and get on HAVING FUN.
Have fun
Paul Kelley
Posts made and opinions expressed are those of the individual forum members
Use of the Forum is subject to the Terms and Conditions
