We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum. This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are - or become - political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.

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

1303133353638

Comments

  • MSE_Molly_G
    MSE_Molly_G Posts: 148 MSE Staff
    10 Posts Photogenic First Anniversary Name Dropper
    Hi all. We've published a news story on this petition: Nationwide urged to give members a say over proposed Virgin Money takeover. Thanks!
  • I think in the spirit of mutuality, Nationwide members should be given a vote. I am concerned about who will benefit from the buyout and doubt that it will be the members of Nationwide
  • 26left
    26left Posts: 65 Forumite
    10 Posts Name Dropper
    eskbanker said:

    Having said that, my understanding remains that the objective of the petition was essentially to deliver an SGM, rather than trying to build critical mass as such, so, once the threshold of 500 qualifying members is met (plus some contingency), it doesn't really matter whether 5,000 or 50,000 sign it, i.e. there's no intrinsic value in larger numbers?
    Looks like the campaign is evolving. See this piece published today that coincided with crossing the 4,000 petition signatories milestone, looking beyond the SGM attempt, to the AGM and beyond.  

    What’s next for the campaign

    • Objective is to give members a say on the deal
    • SGM request deemed "not valid" and a second one can't happen until September after 4 month lockout period around the AGM, so what's next
    • Recognises three different categories of supporters under the same objective: 1) “the democrats”, 2) “the undecided” and 3) those “against”
    • Timeline in terms of things that could upset the deal in the short / medium / long terms goals 
    • Then goes on to list 7 different ways the deal could be disrupted and/or members get a say.
  • boingy
    boingy Posts: 1,664 Forumite
    1,000 Posts First Anniversary Name Dropper
    Kersland said:
    I am concerned about who will benefit from the buyout <snip>
    It will be the directors, and regardless of the outcome they will line their pockets just the same. If it turns ugly they will just shrug and move on to their next "big thing". Kinda like politicians do...
  • friolento
    friolento Posts: 1,876 Forumite
    1,000 Posts First Anniversary Name Dropper Photogenic
    boingy said:
    Kersland said:
    I am concerned about who will benefit from the buyout <snip>
    It will be the directors, and regardless of the outcome they will line their pockets just the same. If it turns ugly they will just shrug and move on to their next "big thing". Kinda like politicians do...

    Assuming your prediction is correct and that you don't like it: how would a members' vote prevent it from happening?
  • 26left
    26left Posts: 65 Forumite
    10 Posts Name Dropper
    friolento said:
    boingy said:
    Kersland said:
    I am concerned about who will benefit from the buyout <snip>
    It will be the directors, and regardless of the outcome they will line their pockets just the same. If it turns ugly they will just shrug and move on to their next "big thing". Kinda like politicians do...

    Assuming your prediction is correct and that you don't like it: how would a members' vote prevent it from happening?
    A member campaign could organise a vote against the re-election of directors at the AGM? So replace them with better ones?

  • masonic
    masonic Posts: 25,485 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 10,000 Posts Photogenic Name Dropper
    edited 27 April 2024 at 6:11AM
    26left said:
    friolento said:
    boingy said:
    Kersland said:
    I am concerned about who will benefit from the buyout <snip>
    It will be the directors, and regardless of the outcome they will line their pockets just the same. If it turns ugly they will just shrug and move on to their next "big thing". Kinda like politicians do...

    Assuming your prediction is correct and that you don't like it: how would a members' vote prevent it from happening?
    A member campaign could organise a vote against the re-election of directors at the AGM? So replace them with better ones?

    I'm already inclined to vote against on the basis of last year's (un)fairer share payment. I don't expect it to make the slightest difference, though, due to the quick vote option.
  • badmemory
    badmemory Posts: 9,067 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    I haven't read all this thread fairly obviously.  But I am a long time member who has done quite nicely thank you out of being with the Nationwide without having to spend all my time shifting my money around.  There have been some comments about it ceasing to be a mutual but that they really cannot do without a vote of those that are entitled to vote on that issue.  Which are long term members only.  A lot of us are long term members to a large extent because we wish them to remain mutual.  Just to be clear for me to vote against remaining as a mutual there would have to be more on the table than ten times what there was when the Lancastrian was sold to Northern Rock & we all know what a success that was.
  • gt94sss2
    gt94sss2 Posts: 5,949 Forumite
    Part of the Furniture 1,000 Posts Name Dropper Combo Breaker
    badmemory said:
     There have been some comments about it ceasing to be a mutual but that they really cannot do without a vote of those that are entitled to vote on that issue.  Which are long term members only.  
    I'm not sure that is correct.

    All members would be able to vote on demutalisation but only the longer ones would be eligible for shares etc. 

    Though Nationwide did once say if they decided to change status, they would give newer members their share as well..
  • badmemory
    badmemory Posts: 9,067 Forumite
    Eighth Anniversary 1,000 Posts Name Dropper
    gt94sss2 said:
    badmemory said:
     There have been some comments about it ceasing to be a mutual but that they really cannot do without a vote of those that are entitled to vote on that issue.  Which are long term members only.  
    I'm not sure that is correct.

    All members would be able to vote on demutalisation but only the longer ones would be eligible for shares etc. 

    Though Nationwide did once say if they decided to change status, they would give newer members their share as well..

    Yes you are correct sorry about that.  However every new member does sign to say they agree to NOT getting a share if they change status.  So that could prove interesting.  However if they do demutalise I would take my cut & then all my money, which will obviously impact them seriously (I wish).  Apart from anything else it would be unsafe to leave all the money with them that they have at present.
Meet your Ambassadors

🚀 Getting Started

Hi new member!

Our Getting Started Guide will help you get the most out of the Forum

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 348.2K Banking & Borrowing
  • 252.1K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 452.3K Spending & Discounts
  • 240.7K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 617K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 175.6K Life & Family
  • 253.9K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 16K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards

Is this how you want to be seen?

We see you are using a default avatar. It takes only a few seconds to pick a picture.