VOTE now! Proposed take over of Virgin Money - Nationwide members should be given a vote

eskbanker

WillPS said:

MSE is an authority. MSE Forum is a mixture of things but rarely an authority.

That's not really true in any objective sense and they don't even claim it themselves!

How this site works

We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of the site. We're a journalistic website and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques, but can't guarantee to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.

However, if the point you're making was to contrast the researched articles on the editorial part of the site with the free-for-all on the forum, then yes, they undoubtedly operate to different standards - that doesn't necessarily mean that the main site is always more accurate though, and in many cases there will be more authoritative sources of data elsewhere, such as gov.uk and providers' own websites....

WillPS

eskbanker said:

WillPS said:

MSE is an authority. MSE Forum is a mixture of things but rarely an authority.

That's not really true in any objective sense and they don't even claim it themselves!

How this site works

We think it's important you understand the strengths and limitations of the site. We're a journalistic website and aim to provide the best MoneySaving guides, tips, tools and techniques, but can't guarantee to be perfect, so do note you use the information at your own risk and we can't accept liability if things go wrong.

However, if the point you're making was to contrast the researched articles on the editorial part of the site with the free-for-all on the forum, then yes, they undoubtedly operate to different standards - that doesn't necessarily mean that the main site is always more accurate though, and in many cases there will be more authoritative sources of data elsewhere, such as gov.uk and providers' own websites....

Very true on both accounts - what I should perhaps have said is I think it is rightly or wrongly treated as an authority by the media and public. I don't think the same could be said of the board.

(That's not a slight on these boards, just commenting that it's silly to believe a 23 page thread on here means a great deal either way in terms of the view of Nationwide's membership, which will of course be largely disinterested.)

Hoenir

pafpcg said:

26left said:

Exodi said

........
I anticipate the statement would summarise many of the valid points raised by others on this forum, eg. 
......
8/ that prices would be higher due to higher costs and borrowing being more expensive under a combined group with weaker financial standing, which will increase the likelihood of members entering into distressed circumstances, putting their homes at risk
......

What does point 8 mean? 

What prices?  And why would the likelihood of members entering into distressed circumstances increase as a result of the proposed merger?

That statement is complete gobbledygook.  Would be dismissed as such. 

Section62

eskbanker said:

...

However, if the point you're making was to contrast the researched articles on the editorial part of the site with the free-for-all on the forum, then yes, they undoubtedly operate to different standards - that doesn't necessarily mean that the main site is always more accurate though, and in many cases there will be more authoritative sources of data elsewhere, such as gov.uk and providers' own websites....

Agree. And the point I made was't that any part of the MSE site is an "authority" but rather that it is "respected", such that it is the kind of place that journalists looking to fill some column inches might visit to find a story - hence potentially being more than the "echo chamber" it was indirectly described as.

IIRC there have been occasions where the media have directly quoted forum members in articles.  (The TSB IT meltdown as a possible example?)

26left

The petition organiser delivered the petition (including a full list of nearly 1,000 names and addresses) with a demand for a Special General Meeting to pass a resolution requiring a member vote on the deal. This was all done in person at Nationwide HQ in Swindon yesterday.

There were clearly some press photographers there to document the occasion as there’s been a fair bit of coverage overnight - Independent, Standard, Mirror.  Lots of local, national and international online titles too given PA also ran the story.

The notes to editors in the press release
include reference to a £25,000 cheque also being handed in alongside the demand - so effectively £50 for each of the first 500 qualifying two year members needed to trigger a SGM.

This is all 21 days before the last possible date for a SGM given the four month lock out period specified in the rules.

So the ball is now firmly in Nationwide’s court. 

See the campaign website for more - 
http://nationwide-virgin-money-member-vote.org.uk/

There’s also a Facebook group too now t for those members involved in the campaign  
https://www.facebook.com/groups/1136814727659119/?ref=share

Money_Grabber13579

26left said:

This is all 21 days before the last possible date for a SGM given the four month lock out period specified in the rules.

I think this all might be a waste of time (and possibly money). For a meeting to be called before 4th May, notice to members will have to be given before the end of today. I haven’t received anything yet.

Olive_Spider

Money_Grabber13579 said:

I think this all might be a waste of time (and possibly money). For a meeting to be called before 4th May, notice to members will have to be given before the end of today. I haven’t received anything yet.

Maybe its a waste of time. Maybe its a waste of money. To me it's the principle that counts.

Foxhouse

Mikael Armstrong (he behind the petition) quoted from Mirror website:

He added: "Nationwide members want and must be given a vote on the proposed takeover of Virgin Money. Denying the society's members, its own customers and owners, a vote on the deal is now an obscene show of arrogance."

I'm not arguing for or against this takeover, as I have no idea whether in the long run it's better for Nationwide's future. What I do know is that the board, under the rules/laws that relate to such matters, are under no obligation to offer the members a vote.

The reason I quote this is to highlight the hypocrisy that takes place in such situations. Armstrong accuses the Society of arrogance, but then claims to speak for me! 

So less than 1000 out of 16000000 (0.00625%) members backed the petition.

Don't know who he thinks he speaks for, but I'm a member of very long standing, and he doesn't speak for me.

26left

Foxhouse said:

Mikael Armstrong (he behind the petition) quoted from Mirror website:

He added: "Nationwide members want and must be given a vote on the proposed takeover of Virgin Money. Denying the society's members, its own customers and owners, a vote on the deal is now an obscene show of arrogance."

I'm not arguing for or against this takeover, as I have no idea whether in the long run it's better for Nationwide's future. What I do know is that the board, under the rules/laws that relate to such matters, are under no obligation to offer the members a vote.

The reason I quote this is to highlight the hypocrisy that takes place in such situations. Armstrong accuses the Society of arrogance, but then claims to speak for me! 

So less than 1000 out of 16000000 (0.00625%) members backed the petition.

Don't know who he thinks he speaks for, but I'm a member of very long standing, and he doesn't speak for me.

I didn't interpret Mikael’s statement that way. I don’t think he’s claiming to speak for *all* members, just the members that signed the petition and are requesting a SGM for a vote on the deal.

As others have pointed out in this thread previously, the law suggests a member vote *IS* legally required. See http://nationwide-virgin-money-member-vote.org.uk/bsa1986.html

Over a 1,000 people have read about, searched for and signed the petition. That’s quite a feat given limited resources and efforts of a motivated few, vs. the millions spent by Nationwide’s team thus far.

WillPS

26left said:

Foxhouse said:

Mikael Armstrong (he behind the petition) quoted from Mirror website:

He added: "Nationwide members want and must be given a vote on the proposed takeover of Virgin Money. Denying the society's members, its own customers and owners, a vote on the deal is now an obscene show of arrogance."

I'm not arguing for or against this takeover, as I have no idea whether in the long run it's better for Nationwide's future. What I do know is that the board, under the rules/laws that relate to such matters, are under no obligation to offer the members a vote.

The reason I quote this is to highlight the hypocrisy that takes place in such situations. Armstrong accuses the Society of arrogance, but then claims to speak for me! 

So less than 1000 out of 16000000 (0.00625%) members backed the petition.

Don't know who he thinks he speaks for, but I'm a member of very long standing, and he doesn't speak for me.

I didn't interpret Mikael’s statement that way. I don’t think he’s claiming to speak for *all* members, just the members that signed the petition and are requesting a SGM for a vote on the deal.

As others have pointed out in this thread previously, the law suggests a member vote *IS* legally required. See http://nationwide-virgin-money-member-vote.org.uk/bsa1986.html

Over a 1,000 people have read about, searched for and signed the petition. That’s quite a feat given limited resources and efforts of a motivated few, vs. the millions spent by Nationwide’s team thus far.

That would be "the petitioners I represent" not "Nationwide's members". I concur with @Foxhouse; self-entitlement writ large.