Port Vale: A Light At The End Of The Tunnel?


Ian began writing Twohundredpercent in May 2006. He lives in Brighton. He has also written for, amongst others, Pitch Invasion, FC Business Magazine, The Score, When Saturday Comes, Stand Against Modern Football and The Football Supporter. Ian was the first winner of the Socrates Award For Not Being Dead Yet at the 2010 NOPA awards for football bloggers.

You may also like...

4 Responses

  1. Valiant says:

    I think you criticism of Mark Sims’ stance is a little unfair. Once he accepts the role of director he will have to take considerable financial guarantees. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to ask for a look at the club’s financial health before he does so. I advise you to keep your eyes on Vale Park and watch what excuses the Board come up with for failing to let Sims see the financial information he wants.

    You also failed to mention that Sims had sponsorship for his director’s role sorted long before the EGM, only to have it withdrawn at the last minute when his sponsor switched sides on the morning of the meeting – that is a can of worms you may wish to investigate as well.

    Mark Sims has actually put about twice as much money into Vale in terms of sponsorship in recent years than all of the three remaining Board members have invested in total. He deserves more respect than he is being shown at the moment by the rump Board who only kept their seats because of their own personal shares. In each case, their majority in the vote was less than their own shareholding.

    You might also like to have a look at the process by which Micky Adams was elected to the Board. The voting papers were a total sham – no address, no details of shareholding, just a name had to be written on them. Think about that one as well!!

  2. Confused.com says:

    So Robbie Williams has sponsored Sims in order to get him onto the Board, which implicitly suggests Sims hasn’t the wonga to be a director. Why, then, is Sims faced with upholding financial guarantees? Shouldn’t that responsibility fall on his sponsor?

  3. Mark Murphy says:

    I haven’t criticised Sims for wanting to look at the books. Quite the opposite. As I’ve emphasised in two articles now, Sims’ due diligence is the key to Vale solving their problems, both financial and political.
    My criticism is of his disregard for the formalities, which gave the current regime an excuse – and a valid one – to hold matters up. As you rightly suggest, they don’t need an excuse.
    My understanding of Sims original sponsorship was that it part of Lee’s late change of mind. That morally stank but legally?
    Re: your last paragraph, did the independent observers have anything formally to say about this, other than that they were happy with the count?

    Confused.com: In my limited experience of such matters, directors are ultimately responsible for meeting guarantees however they see fit.

  4. Vale_For_real says:

    Good reporting well done. Its great to see an unbiassed take on the facts which cuts throiugh all of the nonsense which is spoken about current Vale events. Please keep it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>