The post you are reporting:
Well Keith I frankly do not care about whether you want my advice or not or would trust it, plenty of people do and pay for it accordingly. Seeing 90% of my income comes from retainers and the success of investments the proof of the pudding and all that....
Responding to your points I should point out that I am not part of the project , dont have inside information and cannot answer for them officially, but I can provide some answers from what was said at the meeting. Perhaps Peter might say more and confirm/correct me if I have misunderstood or got anything wrong.
I will tackle your points as you raise them.
3/ I fail to see the point you make about the £10, it is peanuts and is low enough to be open to anyone. I did not expect to see over 400 people at the meeting last week...or to see them so supportive either. That sum is nothing to do with the viability question as this does not form the financing of the project, it just provides a 'membership' so to speak and any rights that may go with it.
4/ Well you have people involved who have considerable experience in Port operations and specialists the financing of infrastructure projects such as this. These people know what they are talking about and as far as I can see there are good and reasonable reasons for any unanswered questions that do not call into question the viability of the project.
5/ You may not be aware that financing through debt bonds confers no ownership rights or operational say to the investors unlike equity ownership through shares. They will get their return from the interest paid and have indicated that this project will attract low risk investors who will demand a low interest due to the issues being viewed as 'investment grade'. You may not know but if the City had concerns over the viability of the People's Port the debt bonds would be 'high grade' issues paying higher rates of interest, maybe what the media call 'junk bonds'.
You may not trust the City and it may be that prejudice that holds back you from supporting the scheme, fair enough, but I do not see that as a valid concern at all seeing the facts of the matter.
6/ Your '6' of course, not mine. This is simply not an issue at all, as no equity ownership is conveyed to the financiers the matter will not arise. Of course future bond issues for Port development must be based on the viability of Port and whatever project the cash is raised for but that is perfectly normal commercial practise and again does not convey equity ownership. Only the members will get a say and even then it will not be on detailed management issues as this must be left to the appointed managers.
7/ Again yours: Not a matter of concern as this is not funding the project and only conveys membership and a say. I am actually quite optimistic about the potential take-up and really quite excited about it and being a part of this project.
8/ Your 8 again - no - those who pay up will have their say of course but other stakeholders, the councils, voluntary groups etc I believe will all have a say regardless. Indeed in the unlikely event that few individuals join up with £10 these groups will have a greater say. Not necessarily positive but not a negative either and this does not impact on viability.
9/ That is a good question and perhaps Peter or someone might give a better idea than I can. I believe that you will have the same kind of say/rights as you would if a member of a building society or co-op. That to me, says it all really.