Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

FYI: MindArk's president J-W Timkrans has been let go!

Status
Another interesting thing is that Fred Rosenthal, Urban Näsman and Christophe Moran seems to be missing from Ratsit and Sven Birger Sandberg looks to be a new boardmember. A board needs to consist of 4 people minimum according to Swedish law if I remember correctly. Does this mean Bridge resigned or did JW boot them? What will Bridge do now with their stocks? Will JW refute the earlier option of Bridge buying additional stocks if MA falls short on cash?

Anyone heard the name Sven Birger Sandberg in connection with MA before?
 
Last edited:
Thank god MA didn't just tell us what happened. :rolleyes: What would people have to speculate about?? :laugh:
 
Steve_saber said:
Thank god MA didn't just tell us what happened. :rolleyes: What would people have to speculate about?? :laugh:
Click to expand...

This weekend there will probably be fewer deposits and more withdraw buttons clicked.
A deadline when more info would be given is minimum.
 
Last edited:
Sircus said:
Another interesting thing is that Fred Rosenthal, Urban Näsman and Christophe Moran seems to be missing from Ratsit and Sven Birger Sandberg looks to be a new boardmember. A board needs to consist of 4 people minimum according to Swedish law if I remember correctly. Does this mean Bridge resigned or did JW boot them? What will Bridge do now with their stocks? Will JW refute the earlier option of Bridge buying additional stocks if MA falls short on cash?

Anyone heard the name Sven Birger Sandberg in connection with MA before?
Click to expand...

A board can have just one board member, i depends on what the "bolagsordningen" in the company says. I can be that they firsta kick out the one that made the "take over" and now when Timkrans have control of the board again he is useing the board to kick out the new CEO before he even start the work....:p
I guess we will see soon.
 
billairboy said:
A board can have just one board member, i depends on what the "bolagsordningen" in the company says. I can be that they firsta kick out the one that made the "take over" and now when Timkrans have control of the board again he is useing the board to kick out the new CEO before he even start the work....:p
I guess we will see soon.
Click to expand...

Oh didnt know that, thx for sharing. We dont know the new CEO´s contract but I wonder if he has got a hefty severance pay. JW might keep him around abit.
 
K. what is the bottom line of all these? can anybody summarize?
 
Infinity01 said:
K. what is the bottom line of all these? can anybody summarize?
Click to expand...


Board meeting was held.. old board members were kicked.. new chairman was selected (Jan Welter).. The new CEO is still John Andinsson... other then that they are selecting new board members and we will see what becomes of all this.. ;)
 
Nor Alien said:
Board meeting was held.. old board members were kicked.. new chairman was selected (Jan Welter).. The new CEO is still John Andinsson... other then that they are selecting new board members and we will see what becomes of all this.. ;)
Click to expand...


Thanks!
Meaning things are not going well............I hope they recognize that the status quo is not working ..... and do something to decrease the cost of play mostly by reducing MU... and try to bring in new players who will actually play for fun and do depo... as opposed to leeches
 
I'm very confused.. Jan was kicked out 2 weeks ago by shareholders and then 3 days ago shareholders kicked out the new guy and put Jan back? Is this a large international corporation or a freaking sewing club?
 
Centech said:
I'm very confused.. Jan was kicked out 2 weeks ago by shareholders and then 3 days ago shareholders kicked out the new guy and put Jan back? Is this a large international corporation or a freaking sewing club?
Click to expand...

Backdoor deals, intrigue, sercrecy, politics.....sounds right to me. That's how most companies work. Usually the bigger the company the better they are at it. Given this fiasco, i'd say MA have a ways to go before they reach "large"... :D
 
Centech said:
I'm very confused.. Jan was kicked out 2 weeks ago by shareholders and then 3 days ago shareholders kicked out the new guy and put Jan back? Is this a large international corporation or a freaking sewing club?
Click to expand...

From what i understood so far, Jan got kick as a result from a vote not taking into account shares held by a bank - this has been somewhat "corrected" now...

Jan is now chair of the board (again?), but what this means (especially for the CEO) is still unclear.


That Jan is re-establish with a pretty small majority of votes is probably not good and may lead to more power struggling in the near future - after all (again, from what i understood so far), the shares held by Jan himself PLUS his support from other shareholders (w/o the shares held by that bank) were not enough to keep him in his position, so the majority "pro" Jan is very small to say the least...
 
wizzszz said:
From what i understood so far, Jan got kick as a result from a vote not taking into account shares held by a bank - this has been somewhat "corrected" now...

Jan is now chair of the board (again?), but what this means (especially for the CEO) is still unclear.


That Jan is re-establish with a pretty small majority of votes is probably not good and may lead to more power struggling in the near future - after all (again, from what i understood so far), the shares held by Jan himself PLUS his support from other shareholders (w/o the shares held by that bank) were not enough to keep him in his position, so the majority "pro" Jan is very small to say the least...
Click to expand...


Something along these lines???
 
MA's creating drama to keep the heat off the planet partners? (much the same way the Governments around the world typically do something completely stupid to draw attention of the reporters off of the big things "the real story" they should be looking at?)
 
Last edited:
Sircus said:
Another interesting thing is that Fred Rosenthal, Urban Näsman and Christophe Moran seems to be missing from Ratsit and Sven Birger Sandberg looks to be a new boardmember. A board needs to consist of 4 people minimum according to Swedish law if I remember correctly. Does this mean Bridge resigned or did JW boot them? What will Bridge do now with their stocks? Will JW refute the earlier option of Bridge buying additional stocks if MA falls short on cash?

Anyone heard the name Sven Birger Sandberg in connection with MA before?
Click to expand...
might explain some of Silverfox's latest auctions?

Well, if Jan can make the Mindbank happen by taking away his CEO status and going to chairman, let him have his chair! :) ;)
 
Last edited:
mastermesh said:
might explain some of Silverfox's latest auctions?
Click to expand...

You mean like the one that was going for a few hundred ped and some av named ladyfox or something like that came in and bumped the bid up to like 4k ped? :laugh:
 
wizzszz said:
From what i understood so far, Jan got kick as a result from a vote not taking into account shares held by a bank - this has been somewhat "corrected" now...

Jan is now chair of the board (again?), but what this means (especially for the CEO) is still unclear.


That Jan is re-establish with a pretty small majority of votes is probably not good and may lead to more power struggling in the near future - after all (again, from what i understood so far), the shares held by Jan himself PLUS his support from other shareholders (w/o the shares held by that bank) were not enough to keep him in his position, so the majority "pro" Jan is very small to say the least...
Click to expand...


well... it would suggest to me, if he has the backing of a majority to be chairman, that same majority is happy with the other chap as CEO, otherwise they wouldnt have supported his appointment. Or looked at another way, Timkrans doesnt wish to be CEO anymore and prefers the chairman role (less day to day operations, more promoting the business).
 
aridash said:
well... it would suggest to me, if he has the backing of a majority to be chairman, that same majority is happy with the other chap as CEO
Click to expand...

I got to dig up the post, he regained majority by some shares that were somehow not taken into account before, so we do not know if it is still the majority (inclusing those shares) that wanted the new CEO.

aridash said:
otherwise they wouldnt have supported his appointment.
Click to expand...

We do not know if he really supported the new CEO - Jan didn't resign voluntarily from what it seems.
 
aridash said:
well... it would suggest to me, if he has the backing of a majority to be chairman, that same majority is happy with the other chap as CEO, otherwise they wouldnt have supported his appointment. Or looked at another way, Timkrans doesnt wish to be CEO anymore and prefers the chairman role (less day to day operations, more promoting the business).
Click to expand...

Or he's willing to step aside for now, and give fresh eye's a chance without a further fight...I mean it's not not like chairman and board has no power. :) The Ceo mostly does the day to day decisions...direction and major decisions have to have approval of the board...there are many ways to weild power ;)
If it goes well, he makes money, everyones happy and he's chair of the board of a successful company. If it gets worse (god forbid :eek: ) He could likely regain the ceo job fairly easy. There are times to fight and times to relax. I personally hope calm heads prevailed and we can move forward.
Either way frankly the drama is doing nobody any good. This delay on letting everyone know who's running the ship doesn't help anyone. Petty power struggles do nothing to help EU...just sayin... ;)
 
Last edited:
Steve_saber said:
Or he's willing to step aside for now, and give fresh eye's a chance..
Click to expand...

Well after all, the guy who is ceo currently specialises in clearing up management issues and putting a company in a very good place, and then moving onto the next company in trouble.
 
mastermesh said:
MA's creating drama to keep the heat off the planet partners? (much the same way the Governments around the world typically do something completely stupid to draw attention of the reporters off of the big things "the real story" they should be looking at?)
Click to expand...

That may explain the sudden rush of events and responses to the issues that happened in the past months.

Sometimes the hardest thing to do is for a company to look at itself in the mirror.

I imagine that MA hasn't had a chance to reflect in a while =/
 
FYI:

On the Annual General Meeting, Jan Welter Timkrans himself held 44.91% of the shares and represented Carnegie Investment AB holding 5.74% of the shares. As a result JWT's vote should have accounted for 50.65%, thus representing the absolute majority.

However, after a discussion at the beginning of the meeting the participants decided not to allow the right to vote for the shares of Carnegie Investment AB , on the ground that Carnegie Investment AB had not registered properly for the meeting. This decision left Jan Welter Timkrans with only 47.65% shares of the vote.
Click to expand...

Quote taken from here, corrected decimal separators by me.



It seems on the next meeting these 5.74% of the shares were registered properly, which gave Jan a weight of 50.65% again (as opposed to 47.65% he had w/o the Carnegie Investment shares: 44.91% / (100% - 5.74%) = 47.65%)


wizzszz said:
[That] Jan is re-establish with a pretty small majority of votes...
Click to expand...

As i said before, Jans support among the shareholders isn't very strong, apparently every share not controlled by him (directly or indirectly) voted against him...
 
Last edited:
Hmmmm..

mastermesh said:
might explain some of Silverfox's latest auctions?

Well, if Jan can make the Mindbank happen by taking away his CEO status and going to chairman, let him have his chair! :) ;)
Click to expand...

Don't look at the man behind the curtain (Wizard of Oz context)..look at the left hand..Oh No!! don't look at what the right hand is doing!!!!;) I think this announcement desrves its own thread..anybody?:wtg:
 
[revolutionary mode]

How about us, players, not spending money in this game for at least a week, making a stand and finally affecting things going on at MA?

It's not MMORPG, the player base is tiny, MA income comes only from a couple thousand people here.

All these shares, percentages, presidents and meetings only exist because you pay for it every day.

Why are you always behaving like cattle in a pen, always looking up in fear "what THEY will do with US this time"?

Grow a back bone, make a stand, this game's only value is you, not 3D models, there is not so many of active players and big depositors here (left), unite, you can influence the game and MA directly.

One economic strike will change the way MA's been treating you for years forever.

If you are an active player or depositor, U-N-I-T-E and strike, quit playing this game for a month, and I promise you, YOU will own THEM forever.

You need to find willpower to do it only once in a lifetime, this is your money and your fun, fight for it.

Isn't it easier that to keep behaving like slaves, whining and living in fear?


[/revolutionary mode]
 
Last edited:
wizzszz said:
We do not know if he really supported the new CEO - Jan didn't resign voluntarily from what it seems.
Click to expand...

as you show above, Timkrans apparently has control of a majority. the point is he must have agreed to a split of CEO/Chairman roles, or he would have voted in himself as CEO, shirley? unless the additional vote agreed to back him for one post and not the other. either way, i think some read too much in to the board room musical chairs with little information to base it on.
 
aridash said:
as you show above, Timkrans apparently has control of a majority. the point is he must have agreed to a split of CEO/Chairman roles, or he would have voted in himself as CEO, shirley? unless the additional vote agreed to back him for one post and not the other. either way, i think some read too much in to the board room musical chairs with little information to base it on.
Click to expand...

Apparently not - did you read my post? All of it? Did you try to understand the math?


His majority is as thin as ice (0.65% only), and this includes the Carnegie shares - the invalidation of these 5.74% lead to a loss of the absolute majority - and gave his vote a weight of 47.65%...

Now he couldn't manage to get 2.36% (50.01%-47.65%) of the OTHER votes (read i.e. ONE small shareholder) to vote for him, otherwise he wouldn't have been fired as CEO.


And well, "agreed to a split of CEO/Chairman roles" - apparently Jan was only CEO, never Chair of the board - because the 4 (!) member board didn't vote for him all the time - so, shirley, you're saying he tried to lose the job as CEO on purpose? Even if he would have been chairman, a simple "i resign" would have done, you know... no need to get himself kicked like that.
 
Last edited:
The very narrow margin was at the june 1 meeting. We know nothing about the votes in the sep 19 meeting yet. Just that a new board was appointed.

You only need 50.01% to be in absolute control of a company.

The board has full control of who is CEO and can dismiss a CEO and appoint a new one anytime.

So:
Jan can become CEO anytime he likes if he controls the board.

It would be interesting to know how many of the 23% of shares that didnt vote june 1 did vote in the sep 19 and who they supported.

Anyway I hope Mindark will have control settled soon so they can concentrate on getting the company profitable and successful.
 
Status
Back
Top