Conway Stewart Manufacturing (UK) ltd

Thought people might be interested to see who the key executives are in the current set up at Conway Stewart.

Bloomberg Business Week

They are obviously to subscribing to the new UK policy where it is illegal to force people to retire at the age of 65. I believe their ages now must be around 135 and 128, respectively!!

Andy

Hi Andy,
Mmmmmmhhhhhhhhh.......sounds like someones been digging up a few skeletons from the past.......either that or it's the second coming and there's something in all that "being born again @$#%"....I might have to review my current "religious" position.

That said, regardless of that "stuff up" it's a rather complicated setup in place at present, or so it appears ( and such setups seem to be so those with a vested interest can "walk away" without being directly accountable....or financially liable) From the "outside" I have some doubts about the current setup with the Plymouth PC and it's ability to fund past a year or so, it seems to be a fairly speculative venture funded from selling the assets for about 10% of the book value to the company accountant....if ever a conflict of interest arose this appears to be a prime example...and you'd end up in goal in Australia. From what I've managed to understand from the limited info. I have seen this appears from the outside to be the "ugly" face of pre-pack, I hope it wasn't as bad as it seemed from where I sit....if it was there must be a lot of unhappy people. Anyway i had a decent "rant" on the FPN about this....apparently done delicately enough to avoid the "big boot" into the naughty corner...which came as a surprise!!

I look forward to your comments on the current state of play and opinion or the new setup and where it seems to be heading.

Regards
Hugh

I look forward to your comments on the current state of play and opinion or the new setup and where it seems to be heading.

If I were a CS dealer, an employee or happened to be owed money by the company, or even a committed user of their pens, I would probably have strong opinions but, to be perfectly honest, I really don't care what happens to Conway Stewart any more. I'm afraid I have viewed the goings on there over recent times with little more than an air of detached amusement, an attitude that seems to be reflected in the listing I mentioned!

I can only assume things are not yet all well - the company made quite a high profile splash about their proposed attendance at one of our regional pen shows last weekend but they didn't show up for some reason and, as far as I know, no explanation has been offered.

Andy

Hugh,

I was just quick enough to see your latest contribution before it was removed from FPN - how typical they should deal with the matter by trying to pretend it doesn't exist rather than by providing a simple answer to what was a straightforward observation.

After all, the subject of CS participation in the show was first revealed in a topic posted in the FPN CS forum on March 9th - surely the many FPN members who attended the show must have been curious as to why they were not in evidence there? An update to that topic apologizing for their unavoidable absence would have been all that was required to stop any speculation.

Andy

Hugh,

I was just quick enough to see your latest contribution before it was removed from FPN - how typical they should deal with the matter by trying to pretend it doesn't exist rather than by providing a simple answer to what was a straightforward observation.

After all, the subject of CS participation in the show was first revealed in a topic posted in the FPN CS forum on March 9th - surely the many FPN members who attended the show must have been curious as to why they were not in evidence there? An update to that topic apologizing for their unavoidable absence would have been all that was required to stop any speculation.

Andy

Hi Andy,


That was how I saw it !!...that contribution was not taken very well by the dutchman, Wim, who promptly kicked me out of the Conway forum until I "learn to behave".

"You have been given a few warning points for your last post, now invisibled, in the CS topic on its sale. We did mention before that we don't particularly like it that you have the need to express the negativity you seem to feel for CS every time you get a chance - you received a message about this before.

We don't mind explanations of how things work regarding receivership and sales, but I do happen to know that CS is trying to do its utmost to stay alive, and some of your comments are borderline in this regard anyway. Hence more than one warning point.

One more and your account will be suspended for three weeks. BTW, you won't be able to access the CS forum anymore from now on, until you prove you can behave better.

Regards, Wim
On behalf of the FPN Admin Team"


I doubt I'll receive a reply to this:


"Wim,
Fair enough, I was surprised to have been allowed so much leniency so this comes as little surprise. Still what is said on this forum by anyone will have no effect on the future of CS, that is in their hands. If you read most of what I've said with an open unbiased mind it's neither negative or positive (rather unpopular with some though), simply interpreting the available facts and applying them to the situation, sometimes correctly, sometimes incorrectly, which is the essence of an open discussion because the truth (or a correct understanding) is not reached by being one sided. My last post just reflects the facts as interpreted by those there."


A rather strange group of people running the FPN when it comes to facts.


Regards
Hugh

Hi Andy,


SNIP

A rather strange group of people running the FPN when it comes to facts.

Regards
Hugh

Ol' Al Einstein once said, more or less, that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.

While I realize FPN is a "Big Board", I still wonder why fellows keep going back to play when they get kicked in the teeth for their efforts. My solution was rather more elegant when they tried it once with me...

I have it on good authority that serious and intense discussions are not trivially squelched here.

-d

Ol' Al Einstein once said, more or less, that the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.

While I realize FPN is a "Big Board", I still wonder why fellows keep going back to play when they get kicked in the teeth for their efforts. My solution was rather more elegant when they tried it once with me...

I have it on good authority that serious and intense discussions are not trivially squelched here.

-d

Hi David

Insane...me? ....well perhaps ...anyway in this case Ol' Al was off the mark as I was expecting the same outcome!!... More a matter of principle than any thing else...or stupidity. While the FPB is "big" most of the "big" seems to be "chat" or in the Conway forum a very commercial approach ( to the point that I wonder how many are simply company manufactured identities...how many " look at my lovely new xxxxx" people are really out there? ), a lot less posting there than 12 months ago in the "hard core" areas. Truth is it's never recovered from your "departure", that was an excellent example of a poor "decision" on their part.

I have to agree, your solution IS better and on that note ..well done!! And as you know I loke a good ol' fashioned discussion...whether right or wrong.....

Regards
Hugh

My solution was rather more elegant when they tried it once with me...

I still think you were hacked, I mean framed.

Hugh,

How about posting the deleted thread here? I'm a CS novice and know almost nothing about the ongoing saga.

T

Hugh,

How about posting the deleted thread here? I'm a CS novice and know almost nothing about the ongoing saga.

T

I'll post a link when the FPNs up and going again (maintenance apparently) . To put in a "condensed" form in the UK you can do a form of managing company insolvency with what's called a " pre-pack". What this means is the owners can negotiate a sale before entering administration and the sale is completed within hours of the court appointing an administrator. The theory is the sale price should be better as sale is not "tainted" by the presence of an administrator, the business has continuity of ownership and the staff have some certainty. The down side is that it's often used to simply "get rid" of debt ( once entering admin. the debt is then paid from the available funds) and often sold to people connected to the company.

In the case of CS , and here I must stress I'm working off what has been reported in the press and applying the logical conclussion from such ( there is some room for error, but the basics are easily seen), the previous owners sold the company to a group that included the company accountant for 38,000 pounds.....the company had assets of 340,000 pounds as determined by the administrator. The actual debt level is unknown but trading losses of over 500,000 pounds where reported. So the "new" CS ( now the Plymouth Pen Co.) got a " golden handshake" of 300,000 odd pounds.....funded by the creditors of the "old" CS who would have received next to nothing after the admin. took his fees. Those that had provided goods and services to CS really got "done over" in this deal, while the company accountant had a rather nice windfall at their expense. This is the main reason I've been shut down, it's very bad publicity for CS....and so it should be.

What will happen (speculation based on experience, and CS is owned by an accountant!!) is the assets ( given the business I assume the assets are the actual factory (?), nothing else would be worth that much imo) will be sold to fund the ongoing operation ( asset stripped, it was losing 140k a year and I doubt few will be prepared to fund it as the risks are rather substantial and the track record poor) , the 30,000 purchase price returned to those that paid it, and if the much vaunted joint venture fails ( with this crowd , who at the time may not have been aware of the terms of the pre-pack...I certainly wouldn't want to be associated with the sort of behaviour displayed above) CS will just disappear (before all the funds are used up...) but the accountant and co. will make a nice little profit. As well this is a "tiered" structure ( companies owning companies etc.) so any negative implications simply by pass those involved leaving them with a "clean slate".

What I've said is negative to CS, but in the overall picture that includes creditors it's simply stating the facts. When a business goes under it's negative, when handled as best as possible ( ie best returns to those owed, employee security etc) it's still negative but at least it's as fair to all involved as it can be given the situation. In this case a legal option was used to increase the negative affect to creditors while being very positive to the purchaser...a person previously associated with the company. That, imo, is an example of pre-pack at it's worst.

In a nut shell, the truth is not pleasant , those on the FPN with financial links to CS don't like it....and they know what I say is correct as they didn't kick me of the whole board despite previous threats to do so. Anyway here I can tell it as I see it.. there is room for error on my part as all the facts aren't known.

Still the actual product is generally regarded as good quality, although a number of dissatisfied customers did surface....some what more than I would have expected given the size of the CS forum..appeared to be mainly QC issues easily fixed.

Here's the topic now it's back online.

Regards
Hugh

Edit to add this topic also on the FPN, before it became known the company had already been sold. The performance of the moderator and CS employee Mary , in light of what she really knew, is interesting to say the least...classic "pulling at the heart " stuff.

The links have been broken...sensitive people over there.

For the benefit of FarmBoy, a self-proclaimed CS novice, it might also be worthwhile adding that the present CS company has no connection whatsoever with the company that produced a wonderful range of pens between 1905 and 1975......

Andy

Looks like I'm out of the FPN...

Hugh,

I've noticed you've copied the content of my messages here to your own board for discussion. I don't know if you realized, but these messages are PMs, or Private Messages. Posting these in a public forum is a breach of privacy and confidentiality, and reason enough for a ban.

You have two options:
1) Remove the topic in question from your board, within 24 hours, and apologize in public, here, on FPN in Community Feedback, and on your own board.
2) Do nothing and be banned from FPN.

Note: no discussion will be entertained on this subject, it is a matter of principle.

As mentioned, 24 hours from now.

Wim


My reply..


Wim

1. I am subject to no privacy clause (or obligation) in regard to the FPN. Your messages to me and how I choose to deal with them is at my discretion. I am well versed in privacy issues.

2. A simple request to me to remove the posting with a reason would have been sufficient, they are your words directed to me and if you wished them to be removed I would have no reason no to do so. To threaten me is a different matter, you may own this board, you don't own the one I posted on. You can't tell me what to do elsewhere.....these are pen forums...what a misplaced idea that privacy has in any way been breached.

3. It's not "my board", I believe Dr Isaacson is the owner. I post there as I did here.

4. I suggest you contact the Admin. of that board re: removal

5. I have "no axe to grind" with you, I am sorry you have taken such offense to my actions...likewise I think yours have been based on poor judgement.

6. There will be no need to ban me, I am more than happy to depart.

7. I have enjoyed my time on the FPN , while I'd prefer to leave on a better note that's not the case, and I wish you and those associated with the FPN all the best in the future.

Regards
Hugh

Looks like I'm out of the FPN...

Hugh,


SNIP
7. I have enjoyed my time on the FPN , while I'd prefer to leave on a better note that's not the case, and I wish you and those associated with the FPN all the best in the future.

Regards
Hugh

Good thing they cannot have you drawn and quartered. Brawling by internet instead of in person has some advantages

Most impressive arrogance though by FPN.

I was a happy clam the day I said goodbye. They likely will not forget the message I left. . You will find you do just fine, Hugh. Besides, we can use a few extra posts here

-d

Hugh, David, et al.

As originator of this topic, can I make a few observations on what has passed here over the last few days.

Firstly, it is a real shame that what was originally intended as a humorous observation has given rise to all this fall-out.

Secondly, though I haven't posted over at FPN for some years following my own particular disagreements with them, I have occasionally used their PM system to help out people who have asked specific questions in the CS forum that happen to be within my limited field of knowledge. Some members have been grateful for the contact, others have ignored my message completely, but such is life. I hope this policy of banning people who don't keep contents of PMs secret only applies to Hugh (who was on their 'naughty radar' anyway), because I wouldn't like a similar fate to befall the member I helped a few weeks back, who innocently posted some of the contents of my PM to him in open forum without my prior knowledge. As it happens, I have no problem with this at all and I don't feel the need for a public apology! In fact, PMs have never been a total secret on FPN. If you send a PM to a moderator, it will often be openly discussed between the other moderators and admins and, to my mind, this is little different to sharing it with a larger circle. For this reason, I always understood that PM stood for 'Personal message' rather than 'Private message'.

Thirdly, it is interesting to have confirmation that Wim visits this board and I hope he would be welcomed as a member here. It would be good for him to be involved in discussions when he doesn't have the ultimate sanction of suspensions, bans, etc. that make FPN the place it is today.

Andy

Edited to add italic text above

Hugh, David, et al.

As originator of this topic, can I make a few observations on what has passed here over the last few days.

Firstly, it is a real shame that what was originally intended as a humorous observation has given rise to all this fall-out.

Secondly, though I haven't posted over at FPN for some years following my own particular disagreements with them, I have occasionally used their PM system to help out people who have asked specific questions in the CS forum that happen to be within my limited field of knowledge. Some members have been grateful for the contact, others have ignored my message completely, but such is life. I hope this policy of banning people who don't keep contents of PMs secret only applies to Hugh, because I wouldn't like a similar fate to befall the member I helped a few weeks back, who posted some of the contents of my PM to him in open forum without my prior knowledge. As it happens, I have no problem with this at all and I don't feel the need for a public apology! In fact, PMs have never been a total secret on FPN. If you send a PM to a moderator, it will often be openly discussed between the other moderators and admins and, to my mind, this is little different to sharing it with a larger circle. For this reason, I always understood that PM stood for 'Personal message' rather than 'Private message'.

Thirdly, it is interesting to have confirmation that Wim visits this board and I hope he would be welcomed as a member here. It would be good for him to be involved in discussions when he doesn't have the ultimate sanction of suspensions, bans, etc. that make FPN the place it is today.

Andy

Hi Andy,

Recognizing I'm a bit ignorant of all the formal business details involved in this discussion, I note simply that-- independent of the mishegas involving the FPN gestalt administrator "psyche"--- I see very little that is inflammatory in the material posted. I s'pose the two issues in this thread involve 1: The goings on at a pen maker, and 2: the thought processes- such as they are- at a major pen board. This thread might be at least as appropriate for "Elements of Collecting" ("goings on at other boards") as for "Pens from Europe and Asia" .

My guess would be there is no firm policy at FPN such as you outline, instead that cranky moderators simply do what they will. Similarly I doubt Hugh is alone in receiving this treatment.

One goal here at FPnuts/Fountain Pen Board-- recognizing that such goals are easy when the Board remains this small-- is to have a big tent approach. Heck, I've had one lawyer who posts more frequently on Zoss List than here make a perhaps veiled threat against me, and FPB Admin let THAT post stay. Go figure

Wm or WMG or whichever one he is is welcome to join here, no joke. Saw what likely is his IP address peeking in after Hugh's last post. But, i doubt he will. Those who perhaps overdose on the "authority thing" rarely wish to play where they lack that authority.

regards

David

This worthwhile thread has been "pinned" in the Europe/Asia forum, both for its pertinent and interesting content about the manufacture of pens in England and for the insights it offers into the management of other pen fora. Comments remain open, of course.

Regards

Ye Olde Admin

Hi all,

Some general observations( while i found my experience interesting it's now history) regarding the "goings on".

The privacy/confidentiality issue is simple , it's an agreement between all parties involved. If there's no agreement or understanding on the issue it's not relevant.

The second observation is that this has, imo, shown a fundamental flaw in the way the FPN has set up it's various brand forums ( with particular reference to the CS forum). Clearly there is an arrangement with CS (financial?) and this forum is heavily used by CS to promote it's products, as such this should not be a problem. Given the recent financial problems experienced by CS and the presence of a CS employee as the forum moderator this gives rise to the potential for a conflict of interest. Imo there is a clear COI and this has been defended (probably with little thought or understanding) by those running the FPN placing it in the same position. The result is a forum that is unable to openly discuss the real problems facing CS , an issue if your about to transfer a sum of money to purchase a pen from a company that may "fall over" again. The solution is simple, that moderator should step aside until the future of CS is clear and (in this case) Wim should undertake some basic training to do his job properly.

The lastly there are a lot of good people involved in the FPN, the "goings on" in the CS forum shouldn't taint those people.

Regards
Hugh

Hi all,

Some general observations( while i found my experience interesting it's now history) regarding the "goings on".

The privacy/confidentiality issue is simple , it's an agreement between all parties involved. If there's no agreement or understanding on the issue it's not relevant.

The second observation is that this has, imo, shown a fundamental flaw in the way the FPN has set up it's various brand forums ( with particular reference to the CS forum). Clearly there is an arrangement with CS (financial?) and this forum is heavily used by CS to promote it's products, as such this should not be a problem. Given the recent financial problems experienced by CS and the presence of a CS employee as the forum moderator this gives rise to the potential for a conflict of interest. Imo there is a clear COI and this has been defended (probably with little thought or understanding) by those running the FPN placing it in the same position. The result is a forum that is unable to openly discuss the real problems facing CS , an issue if your about to transfer a sum of money to purchase a pen from a company that may "fall over" again. The solution is simple, that moderator should step aside until the future of CS is clear and (in this case) Wim should undertake some basic training to do his job properly.

The lastly there are a lot of good people involved in the FPN, the "goings on" in the CS forum shouldn't taint those people.

Regards
Hugh

I have not followed FPN in some time and have no knowledge of a specific financial deal there with CS. Certainly one of the moderators who was there back in the day has an affiliation with CS, but she is a good egg and that relationship is fine by me so far as it goes. Whether there is a shill presence... who knows. As you suggest, it is rather more sad that good discussion lacking ad hominem routinely is squelched at FPN, but perhaps enforced banality is how one garners 50,000 members

d

I agree with a lot of the points Hugh makes in his second observation.

The second observation is that this has, imo, shown a fundamental flaw in the way the FPN has set up it's various brand forums ( with particular reference to the CS forum). Clearly there is an arrangement with CS (financial?) and this forum is heavily used by CS to promote it's products, as such this should not be a problem. Given the recent financial problems experienced by CS and the presence of a CS employee as the forum moderator this gives rise to the potential for a conflict of interest. Imo there is a clear COI and this has been defended (probably with little thought or understanding) by those running the FPN placing it in the same position. The result is a forum that is unable to openly discuss the real problems facing CS , an issue if your about to transfer a sum of money to purchase a pen from a company that may "fall over" again.

Similar points regarding conflict of interest were the initial cause of my disagreement with FPN a few years back, and the situation is not improved now that moderator is Director of Marketing and Development at Conway Stewart Manufacturing (UK) ltd, rather than just an employee. My main observation at present is that FPN admin has allowed itself to be backed up into such a corner on this point that it feels drastic action is necessary to veto any remotely negative observation about CS. I was the first to post the link to the announcement about CS having been in administration on this board at the end of December, then the link was cross posted by others at FPN (and Pentrace) shortly afterwards. I had known about this for some time beforehand, as had others, the information being in the public domain, so there were no 'privacy' issues. One wonders how many earlier attempts at posting the information on FPN were removed before the cat finally escaped from the bag?

I should emphasize that I have no issues at all with the moderator in question or with Conway Stewart and, as I have said elsewhere in this forum, I wish them luck in turning things around.

Andy

I agree with a lot of the points Hugh makes in his second observation.



Similar points regarding conflict of interest were the initial cause of my disagreement with FPN a few years back, and the situation is not improved now that moderator is Director of Marketing and Development at Conway Stewart Manufacturing (UK) ltd, rather than just an employee. My main observation at present is that FPN admin has allowed itself to be backed up into such a corner on this point that it feels drastic action is necessary to veto any remotely negative observation about CS. I was the first to post the link to the announcement about CS having been in administration on this board at the end of December, then the link was cross posted by others at FPN (and Pentrace) shortly afterwards. I had known about this for some time beforehand, as had others, the information being in the public domain, so there were no 'privacy' issues. One wonders how many earlier attempts at posting the information on FPN were removed before the cat finally escaped from the bag?

I should emphasize that I have no issues at all with the moderator in question or with Conway Stewart and, as I have said elsewhere in this forum, I wish them luck in turning things around.

Andy

Good points. Not uncommon occurrence in the business and charity world, what with who ends up on various boards of directors. FPN's attitude though certainly provides grist for the mill.

-d

I have been following the CS tread on FPN with interest and as an accountant myself I strongly suspect that the company will fold again in the forseeable future. Personally, I would not buy from them directly for fear of losing my money....

I'm probably on the naughty radar at FPN having recently had a damn good rant about the warranty cover of another famous pen maker....