BTW, In early March, City Cabs are holding an EGM. Putting forward a proposal to their members, of a feasibility study, which may result in merging with Central.
Oh dear!I will .of course , listen to their proposals, and after consideration agree or disagree to this. Who knows?.
Clearly not you. But you wont be alone.But, I have to ask, and I will at the meeting, what would the be benefit.
CRT get off the hook for diminishing returns, fancy limousines, RBS bus contract, RBS subsidy by drivers etc Would the merger of these two companies mean that we are better equipped to face the threat of phc?
Nope. They're pashing themelves. It would make the merged company more attractive for buy out. I think the curent offer is £11.5 million adcould be put in place now. Co-operative businesses don't really work. Joining two failing small co-ops just makes a bigger failing co-op. Would the working practices,(very important), change? (I know that many, and I include myself, who have worked with Central, do not wish to work within that regime again).
Wouldn't this just be the merging of two fascist control systems. Both companies have an appalling record of driver abuse. How would any merger improve this?What about the people who work in the offices, who answer the phones, who are responsible for Admin?.
Do you honestly think they're on anyone's radar? Would they be allowed to get in the way of the committee men carving out the deal that benefits them?
Lastly, and least, what about the committee men on both sides?.
Asked and answered. How are two sets of egos going to be fit in? A huge siuper committee. A bigger gravy train? Bet on it. Do you think Murray or the Drylaw bawbag are gonna step aside? The Dodester or Panners? Colin Anderson and his clique? Oh dear.Some of them are going to lose their positions, will they vote for change?.
We've always considered th stumbling block to be naeneck. And that is why Colin Anderson, through Travis Bickle, is working against him. There are dark forces at work here.Somehow, and excuse my negativity, but the answer at the City Cabs EGM will be, No!.
Methinks you got it right first time.
This is fraught with difficulty. There has to be an asset disparity. There is no real clamour from the members. There may well be a referral to monopolies and mergers, I will certainly be asking for one, though I admit I'm not sure it is relevant, but I'll ask anyway. Then there's Fair Trading.
Then there's the consultation cost. And, given the record of both committees, how can the members be sure that the remit given to the consultants is fair and represents their interests?
We've all seen the corrupt Council's surveys. Isn't it within the bounds of likelihood that two committees pushing their own personal interests would be tempted to prejudice the process at the expense of members? How would the members know?
