JF Statement on the OS 21/09

can be found here

http://www.grimsby-townfc.co.uk/page/NewsDetail/0,,10417~2458179,00.html

I thought we wouldn't have to read any of his long winded statements on the OS anymore now he is not chairman. Basically says he is unlikely to commit the money he has promised for the rest of the season.

He doesn't want to do an interview so no-one can ask him any difficult questions.

Using the club website as his mouthpiece is cheap as is revealing personal emails.

his comments are fair.

Parker owns the majority of the club, yet it is fenty who is running it (in an untenable position) and funding it. This is not sustainable, nor desirable. One thought. Has parker put money in and converted it to shares, basically making this position arise, where he can either assume control of the club cheaply, or he will get his money back, as fenty or another will now have to buy him out? Leaving the money as a loan would potentially mean he would never get the money back.

So parker has the controlling interest, fenty has said he wont fund this.

thats what I take from this transcript anyway. We will never know the truth

Wish I had to money to buy-out these two cretins (MP and JF) and ban them from coming anywhere near Blundell Park.

I thought the statement was the usual self serving, waffling drivel. I also agree that leaking e-mails sent between the two of them is extremely unprofessional as is using the official site as his own personal mouthpiece. Also, why can't somebody proof-read them before they're put up for everybody to see? It really does look urine poor publishing something with so many errors.

I'm already completely sick of Fenty and Parker publically playing these pathetic games. I think they're showing a contempt for the fans of the club with these rambling statements, each one of which seems to further confuse the situation.

In fairness to JF why should he fund the club on his own while he is not the highest shareholder

If he wanted to carry on funding the club all he would have to do is purchase more shares in order to regain a controlling interest... The point is he doesn't want to... That's how I see it anyway....

I have a bad feeling about this............

This John Fenty bloke sounds like a right male masturbator.........

Why does he do it? He makes himself look more of a nobhead every time he writes a statement.

I pray this man never has anything to do with GTFC ever again  

It just muddies the water further. It's fine saying things like "Those comments, Mr Parker made, had the potential to lead to volatility and public disorder, when a large gathering of fans were waiting to lynch the remaining directors after being branded 'not forward thinking'"
but what is the evidence to show that we're NOT stuck with a backward thinking bunch of stooges who have claimed a board place with a tiny cash input? Public disorder? Lynching? I seem to remember a rather low key turnout in the car park.

I just hope this personal battle is not going to drag on and on.

Quoted from RoboCod

It just muddies the water further. It's fine saying things like "Those comments, Mr Parker made, had the potential to lead to volatility and public disorder, when a large gathering of fans were waiting to lynch the remaining directors after being branded 'not forward thinking'"
but what is the evidence to show that we're NOT stuck with a backward thinking bunch of stooges who have claimed a board place with a tiny cash input? Public disorder? Lynching? I seem to remember a rather low key turnout in the car park.

I just hope this personal battle is not going to drag on and on.

Prepare to be disappointed...

Quoted from voice of reason

If he wanted to carry on funding the club all he would have to do is purchase more shares in order to regain a controlling interest... The point is he doesn't want to... That's how I see it anyway....

Apparently not according to Fenty.

He says in the statement that "equating" his shares doesn't solve the problem.

Someone ought to knock their heads together,childish pair of fookers.

Quoted from ginnywings

Apparently not according to Fenty.

He says in the statement that "equating" his shares doesn't solve the problem.

Someone ought to knock their heads together,childish pair of fookers.

I can't see how it doesn't solve the problem though...??? If he buys enough shares he will have majority shareholding... Agree with you though, none of them are coming out of this looking good, although I would still prefer MP over JF any day of the week...

Neither of these two are coming out of this spat with any credit. Each statement and counter statement is damaging the club and putting off anyone daft enough to consider working with either of these two major shareholders.

A real chasm between MP and JF is evident. For Godsake, have some decorum, shut your mouths, leave that keyboard alone, get together and work things out for the good of this great football club. I haven't had any dealings with Mike Parker, I have always found John Fenty approachable but I am disgusted he has published extracts of Mike Parker's e-mail on the clubs official site - we are an utter laughing stock, a joke and I am getting angrier by the minute.

This mammary for tat, "he said, she said" mentality is not only confusing but also futile. Can the pair of them not at least start to clarify the various potential scenarios for resolution in the best interests of the club as a whole? It would be a much healthier starting point which might clarify the type of involvement potential new, previous or existing members of the board might look at and possibly give the fans some crumbs of certainty, if not security, at such a troubling time

Quoted from ginnywings

Apparently not according to Fenty.

He says in the statement that "equating" his shares doesn't solve the problem.

Someone ought to knock their heads together,childish pair of fookers.

i'd love to know why it doesn't solve the problem - buying 350k of shares puts him exactly back where he was - majority shareholder and in charge of the club. unless of course that buying shares does not suit his present agenda................

They both want their heads banging together,

It's our club they are playing silly games with,

Thank you both for your money , now urine off and leave it for someone else to run.

Quoted from 75

Neither of these two are coming out of this spat with any credit. Each statement and counter statement is damaging the club and putting off anyone daft enough to consider working with either of these two major shareholders.

A real chasm between MP and JF is evident. For Godsake, have some decorum, shut your mouths, leave that keyboard alone, get together and work things out for the good of this great football club. I haven't had any dealings with Mike Parker, I have always found John Fenty approachable but I am disgusted he has published extracts of Mike Parker's e-mail on the clubs official site - we are an utter laughing stock, a joke and I am getting angrier by the minute.

Sums up my thoughts entirely.

ps anyone else get the impression that parker will be mightily pleased by the reaction he has provoked - a long,rambling, disingenuous, misspelt attempt at rewriting history?

result: fenty looks like a little boy flailing around in all directions, with fans thinking increasingly negative things about him, his motives and his reaction to events

Quoted from forza ivano

i'd love to know why it doesn't solve the problem - buying 350k of shares puts him exactly back where he was - majority shareholder and in charge of the club. unless of course that buying shares does not suit his present agenda................

Fair point, I think! But wouldn't Parker have to agree to sell them? (sorry, I don't understand it all).

Quoted from forza ivano

ps anyone else get the impression that parker will be mightily pleased by the reaction he has provoked - a long,rambling, disingenuous, misspelt attempt at rewriting history?

result: fenty looks like a little boy flailing around in all directions, with fans thinking increasingly negative things about him, his motives and his reaction to events

I agree with you... I think it looks like JF is already losing the plot and we aren't even into round three yet... I mean it takes some desperation to publish private e-mails, I can see why he didn't want to go on the radio but jeez, he's hardly been thoughtful, calm and considered by doing that has he...??? And if he claims that was thoughtful, calm and considered it shows what an absolute prat the guy is...

Two over inflated egos that obviously think that they are bigger and better than the club.What a pair of prats.

Quoted from 75

Fair point, I think! But wouldn't Parker have to agree to sell them? (sorry, I don't understand it all).

no, fenty would buy up 350k of the unissued shares.

ps anyone know why we can't buy the unissued shares?

Quoted from forza ivano

no, fenty would buy up 350k of the unissued shares.

ps anyone know why we can't buy the unissued shares?

Money being the main Issue I would of thought.

Quoted from forza ivano

no, fenty would buy up 350k of the unissued shares.

ps anyone know why we can't buy the unissued shares?

Ahh, surely 'unissued' shares would devalue shares held by existing shareholders? Is there an infinite amount of these 'unissued' shares?

Quoted from Super Clive

Money being the main Issue I would of thought.

sorry ,didn't mean all of them in 1 go; i meant indiviuals buying 12-20 shares eachfor example

Quoted from forza ivano

sorry ,didn't mean all of them in 1 go; i meant indiviuals buying 12-20 shares eachfor example

Sorry mate, although does this have to be approved by the board ?

Quoted from voice of reason

I agree with you... I think it looks like JF is already losing the plot and we aren't even into round three yet... I mean it takes some desperation to publish private e-mails, I can see why he didn't want to go on the radio but jeez, he's hardly been thoughtful, calm and considered by doing that has he...??? And if he claims that was thoughtful, calm and considered it shows what an absolute prat the guy is...

as my mate just emailed me

'revealing personal emails ? that's the lowest of the low

regards

FRANK LEOPOLD'

Quoted from 75

Ahh, surely 'unissued' shares would devalue shares held by existing shareholders? Is there an infinite amount of these 'unissued' shares?

True, but didn't Parker say he that he wouldn't mind this? When Parker bought shares didn't this happen to Fenty's existing shares?

The way I see it Fenty is looking for an exit strategy. He thought he could use Parkers controlling holding as a reason and force Parker into take control of the club. It hasn't work, he hasn't been able to force his hand and as a result we have a situation where neither of our benefactors appear to be willing to further finance the club.


What level of the pyramid will we be able to re-enter into next season?

Quoted from davmariner

True, but didn't Parker say he that he wouldn't mind this? When Parker bought shares didn't this happen to Fenty's existing shares?

i'm fairly certain that there is a set amount of unissued shares - i have a vague recollection of 300-400,000??
and that is why if fenty bought 350k of unissued shres he'd diminish parker's % by a few points and increase his accordingly, so putting fenty back as the majority shareholder

incidentally - i'm beginning to wonder just how the takeover panel was alerted. i'm so cynical that i could imagine that they might be alerted by someone who thought it would be in their interest to have the'pot stirred' by a regulatory body

Quoted from gtfc98

The way I see it Fenty is looking for an exit strategy. He thought he could use Parkers controlling holding as a reason and force Parker into take control of the club. It hasn't work, he hasn't been able to force his hand and as a result we have a situation where neither of our benefactors appear to be willing to further finance the club.


What level of the pyramid will we be able to re-enter into next season?

That was exactly my thoughts on the situation too. My mind hasn't been changed yet... Unless MP can convince himself to running the club and restructuring the board while employing a new Chairperson, I feel the Club could easily be history before the end of the season.

Quoted from forza ivano

i'm fairly certain that there is a set amount of unissued shares - i have a vague recollection of 300-400,000??
and that is why if fenty bought 350k of unissued shres he'd diminish parker's % by a few points and increase his accordingly, so putting fenty back as the majority shareholder

incidentally - i'm beginning to wonder just how the takeover panel was alerted. i'm so cynical that i could imagine that they might be alerted by someone who thought it would be in their interest to have the'pot stirred' by a regulatory body

My thoughts too and if the reason for all of this is as I suspect JF wants out it would suit him for them to come in and say to MP he has to make an offer for all the shares because of that rule 9 shite...

Quoted from gtfc98

The way I see it Fenty is looking for an exit strategy. He thought he could use Parkers controlling holding as a reason and force Parker into take control of the club. It hasn't work, he hasn't been able to force his hand and as a result we have a situation where neither of our benefactors appear to be willing to further finance the club.


What level of the pyramid will we be able to re-enter into next season?

If MP and JF somehow walk away and surrendered their shares / loans etc:

If they walk away and there actually is no debt (no idea if we have overdrafts etc but I think it’s likely), we can cut our cloth accordingly and cut the players wage bill from 900k+ then we could probably compete at this level by gradually releasing the contracted players and replacing them with cheaper players. Trouble is several are contracted beyond this season.

Okay, I'm pulling this out of the air but based on a gate of 3000 fans x 23 games (can't assume cup games) at an average of £12 a punter (big assumption I know, some will be kids etc) the gate receipts would be around 828k per year. Sponsorship and shirt sales, minimal at this level - perhaps 80k to take the total income to around 900k. TV money, don’t think there is any. The ground doesn’t really generate any income streams aside from match days (wonder where I got that term from?!).

Running costs? Utilities, non playing wage bill, ground upkeep, rates, tax AND players wages would have to be no more than 900k which is what we are paying the players alone.

No doubt my figures are woefully inaccurate but if they were about right, we could sustain Conference football on those figures without a benefactor.

If I was a Grimsby Town supporter I'd be tearing my hair out; as it is I've got a soft spot for the club and I find the Fenty/Parker stand-off rather sad. After so many miserable years of decline you finally have reasons to be cheerful and look to a brighter future; then this happens. With H&S, backed by the man who head-hunted them, I was confident of a good season 2011-12 and promotion in May, 2013. If this had all blown up a year ago it wouldn't have been so maddening, but now a train that was steaming towards brighter, sunnier uplands is in danger of derailment.
There's a lot of criticism of Mr Fenty but I'd have thought it was Mr Parker whose disappearance from the stage was more to be desired, providing he doesn't ruin the club financially as he goes.

Quoted from 75

Neither of these two are coming out of this spat with any credit. Each statement and counter statement is damaging the club and putting off anyone daft enough to consider working with either of these two major shareholders.

A real chasm between MP and JF is evident. For Godsake, have some decorum, shut your mouths, leave that keyboard alone, get together and work things out for the good of this great football club. I haven't had any dealings with Mike Parker, I have always found John Fenty approachable but I am disgusted he has published extracts of Mike Parker's e-mail on the clubs official site - we are an utter laughing stock, a joke and I am getting angrier by the minute.

Spot on. Our football club seems to be on the brink of disaster.

Quoted from forza ivano

i'd love to know why it doesn't solve the problem - buying 350k of shares puts him exactly back where he was - majority shareholder and in charge of the club. unless of course that buying shares does not suit his present agenda................

No it doesn't.

Parker owns 1,000,000 shares
Fenty owns 500,000 shares
There are approximately 360,000 other shares owned by minor shareholders.

Therefore currently Parker owns just under 54% of the club, Fenty just under 27% of the club and minority shareholders the remaining 19% or so.

If Fenty bought another 350,000 unissued shares instead of putting the cash in as a loan Parker's shareholding would be diluted to just over 45% and Fenty would still only own around 38% of the club.

It's all a load of rubbish anyway. The other directors only hold a token amount of shares each, so there has been less than 50% of the clubs shares owned by board members since March 1st when Parker left the board. Why has it taken over 6 months for this to become such a big issue and make Fenty's position apparently untenable?

And Fenty for such an experienced business man is forgetting that the board of directors is appointed by the shareholders to run the club, not the other way around.

And for Fenty to question why Parker is looking for a new Chairman external to the boardroom process is ridiculous. As he well knows Parker could call an EGM at any time he chooses and get rid of the entire board and bring his own people in. That is the real issue. It is not that board members don't own 50% of the club, it is that one single other person does and it's 2 months or so from the AGM and Fenty has decided to throw the first punch now.

And to claim the previous 25 years to his arrival had seen boardroom acrimony which harmed the club is daft- we spent 18 of those years in what is now called the Championship, 5 of them in League Two and only 2 of them in League Two. Fenty's stability on the other hand brought us our longest ever spell in the basement division of the Football League followed by Non-League oblivion.

Quoted from GollyGTFC

It's all a load of rubbish anyway. The other directors only hold a token amount of shares each, so there has been less than 50% of the clubs shares owned by board members since March 1st when Parker left the board. Why has it taken over 6 months for this to become such a big issue and make Fenty's position apparently untenable?

I think he must have been hoping to be able to persuade Parker to come back onto the board to continue to help funding the club. Last week, Parker obviously told him he has no intention of doing so - probably cutting his losses.

Not sure what Fenty is up to now. He is either publicising this turn of events so he gets more sympathy from the fans as he continues to bankroll the club or, alternatively, is starting to back off himself.

Let's hope the off-field boardroom games don't affect the on-field games too much.

Running GTFC at a huge loss is totally unsustainable even in the short term. Parker's position is that the club should cut it's cloth accordingly and spend what they earn. I appreciate it's hard to break even in Non-League, BUT planning for a £1 million loss over a year in advance is no way to run any business. Fenty's only solution has always be to throw more and more money in. There is another way.

I thought the most interesting quote was this

"There was a time when Mr Parker was considering rejoining the board of directors, but this was conditional upon several things, one of them was becoming the Chairman. (Supported by correspondence)"

If you ask me, it's sounding more like Mike Parker has been fairly cute with his dealings. He said he's invested around £1.25M to Fenty's £2M, yet as Fenty's investment is significantly in the form of director's loans, Parker ends up as Fenty's boss.

His loans are now at Parker's mercy if he puts the club into admin and most of them get written off.

Looks like another one of Fenty's (and the board's) poor decisions in allowing Parker to work this way. Fenty has now finally realised that Parker isn't going to come good with his promises of matched financial support for the club, whilst it seems Parker cynically expects Fenty to keep bankrolling it in any case.

I'm not a fan of Fenty's, but the way Parker spat out his dummy in March and the shenanigans that have gone on since mean he's not the replacement I would want at BP - neither him or one of his croinies.

you're not quite right golly, but i'm not quite as right as you!

http://www.investegate.co.uk/article.aspx?id=201010191330356356U

here's the announcement from a year ago. this shows that there are 250,000 shares floating about not owned by f & p

parker now owns 54%, which by my reckoning (and presuming neither fenty or anyone else have bought shares in the interim) means that parker has bought c£390k of shares,giving him 890,000 shares, fenty 500,000 and the rest 250,000 (=1,640,00 shares x 54% =885,600)

therefore if fenty were to buy 500,000 of shares the total number becomes 2,140,00 of which he owns 1,000,000 so becoming the biggest shareholder, but still not at the threshold where he would need to offer to buy out all the other shareholders.
course what we'd need to know is how many more unissued shares there are for purchase and who is the 3rd biggest shareholder and would they then hold the balance of power?

As bad a Chairman as he is he'd have to pull something extra special out of the hat to create anything other than boardroom harmony in amongst a board of his own yes men and free loaders.

B ugger me - and everybody thought Peter Furneaux was bad

Stop using the club as a child in a divorce, and sort it out, you stupid tw@ts. Its our clubs future your playing with

Quoted from bradzmilne

Stop using the club as a child in a divorce, and sort it out, you stupid tw@ts. Its our clubs future your playing with

When citing or quoting others work it's normally expected you should highlight the original author of that work... Wouldn't to get accused of plageurism...    

Quoted from voice of reason

When citing or quoting others work it's normally expected you should highlight the original author of that work... Wouldn't to get accused of plageurism...    

? youve lost me mate

Quoted from voice of reason

When citing or quoting others work it's normally expected you should highlight the original author of that work... Wouldn't to get accused of plageurism...    

Errr....plagiarism. Couldn't accuse you of such

Mike resigned because of Peter Furneaux...

I didn't resign because of Peter Furneaux...

Yes, you did Mike...

I don't want to be chairman...

Yes you do Mike...


It's flipping ridiculous. They're grown men. Get together and sort this excrement out because you're playing with the future of something that a lot of people have spent so much time and money on over the years and you're playing with the future of something that a lot of people care about.

Quoted from jock dock tower

Errr....plagiarism. Couldn't accuse you of such

Haha, thanks for that... Knew it was wrong but couldn't be arsed to check the correct spelling...

Quoted from voice of reason

Haha, thanks for that... Knew it was wrong but couldn't be arsed to check the correct spelling...

Boo Hiss! Accusing me of something and spelling it wrong  

Quoted from AndyGTFC

Mike resigned because of Peter Furneaux...

I didn't resign because of Peter Furneaux...

Yes, you did Mike...

I don't want to be chairman...

Yes you do Mike...


It's flipping ridiculous. They're grown men. Get together and sort this excrement out because you're playing with the future of something that a lot of people have spent so much time and money on over the years and you're playing with the future of something that a lot of people care about.

Fenty started the mud slinging but has failed to answer any questions, Parker has only come out and done what needed to be done, he had to explain his position and answer the questions put to him.

The fact that Fenty is still on the board and there is a possibility that he may get some money back is disgusting. We need a clean sweep and a new board.

Quoted from bradzmilne

Boo Hiss! Accusing me of something and spelling it wrong  

Like JDT said, I did it to avoid erm....shite its gone again... plagiarising...???  

Quoted from headingly_mariner

Fenty started the mud slinging but has failed to answer any questions, Parker has only come out and done what needed to be done, he had to explain his position and answer the questions put to him.

The fact that Fenty is still on the board and there is a possibility that he may get some money back is disgusting. We need a clean sweep and a new board.

Yeah, admittedly Parker has come across better than Fenty but he's still part of the situation and he created it in the first place. I'm not bothered about how they do it, I just want the future of the club sorting out as quickly as possible.

Quoted from AndyGTFC

Yeah, admittedly Parker has come across better than Fenty but he's still part of the situation and he created it in the first place. I'm not bothered about how they do it, I just want the future of the club sorting out as quickly as possible.

Created it in the first place by pumping 1 1/4 million quid into the club in shares, what a illegitimate!

There is no realistic way he can get this money back.

These statements that are flying about are they trying to get fans on their side, it's doing me facking head in. I think we all have our own conclusions as to the current problem.

- MP bought more shares instead of a loan increasing his share holding and therefore making him the major shareholder.  Was this done with intent even though he states he does not want to invest any more money or become a director or chairman of GTFC

- JF feels that because he used his money as a loan rather than buying shares and not being major shareholder it's a big deal especially with the major shareholder not being part of the board thus making the running of GTFC very difficult (which I agree to some extent).  Now we all know all he has to to do is increase his shares but is this his chance to step down, well of course it is.

- So the only outcome presently is if MP can convince a friend to take the reigns at BP who we will know nothing about him/her and I very much doubt they would have GTFC at heart.  Now I personally do not think having JF on the board would be very healthy for GTFC being an ex-chairman he could disargree with everything the relationship has clearly broken down he has admitted this.  Also I think it's quite clear the other 2 directors are probably on JF side.  I think and I hope something gets sorted but we need a new board whoever it is, I am unsure what the politics are with the current directors in order to remove them and start afresh.

The only answer I want from Either of the directors is will GTFC still be around come next season I want to know if GTFC is in any danger.

I just want to squeeze this in but I had a right wierd dream the other night, H&S approached JF about the acquisition of Green and was told there is no money what so ever but H&S demanded it and said they would resign if not agreed and so they resigned and now we have a club were the players want out, no managers, no chairman then I woke up lol.

Quoted from forza ivano

you're not quite right golly, but i'm not quite as right as you!

http://www.investegate.co.uk/article.aspx?id=201010191330356356U

here's the announcement from a year ago. this shows that there are 250,000 shares floating about not owned by f & p

parker now owns 54%, which by my reckoning (and presuming neither fenty or anyone else have bought shares in the interim) means that parker has bought c£390k of shares,giving him 890,000 shares, fenty 500,000 and the rest 250,000 (=1,640,00 shares x 54% =885,600)

therefore if fenty were to buy 500,000 of shares the total number becomes 2,140,00 of which he owns 1,000,000 so becoming the biggest shareholder, but still not at the threshold where he would need to offer to buy out all the other shareholders.
course what we'd need to know is how many more unissued shares there are for purchase and who is the 3rd biggest shareholder and would they then hold the balance of power?

I think the third biggest shareholder would be either the trust or Elsom who said he was investing a further 25K in town when Parker left the board, although at the time he did say he hadn't decided whether this would be as a Directors loan or as shares - and that was the last we heard of that.

As for total number of unissued shares - truly I don't know but a PLC can have as many shares as it decides it wants and this level can be increased or decreased by an ordinary resolution voted on by the current shareholders. What we really need is a copy of the minutes where the ordinary resolution to increase the number of shares in the company was passed. I'm guessing that the increase should equate to enough to allow both Parker and Fenty to increase their shareholding to the 2,000,000 they originally agreed to invest (over the two years). Now if either of them didn't intend to buy up the shares then the glass ceiling raised to in terms of unissued shares could have been significantly less, which poses the question of why not raise it by just a million.   But that is just speculation as I can't remember how many extra shares were issued - if any shareholder really wanted to know they could do an Freedom of Information Request.  

Quoted from forza ivano

parker now owns 54%, which by my reckoning (and presuming neither fenty or anyone else have bought shares in the interim) means that parker has bought c£390k of shares,giving him 890,000 shares, fenty 500,000 and the rest 250,000 (=1,640,00 shares x 54% =885,600)

I've did the math and got fairly similar figures (Parker £883K, Fenty £500K, Rest £252K)

Quoted from GollyGTFC

It's all a load of rubbish anyway. The other directors only hold a token amount of shares each, so there has been less than 50% of the clubs shares owned by board members since March 1st when Parker left the board. Why has it taken over 6 months for this to become such a big issue and make Fenty's position apparently untenable?

Exactly !!!!

Fenty said himself:

"When Mr Parker left the board several things fundamentally changed. The concert party, he, and I working together (in Concert) had been broken. Share holder control did not sit within the board room. This was before any further shares had been issued."

SO WHY NOW ?
Why no take over panel before ?

My GUESS is Fenty wants to remain in sole charge as long as there is a chance it could be successful and isn't getting the blame.

After the poor start (and abuse), things have come to a head financially (partly through his own doing IMO) and with half a reason, senses it is time to play his hand and try to get Parker to take over to give himself an exit strategy before it all goes down the swanny.

However if Fenty still wants control it might be a tactic whilst he's in the hotseat to resign and "call out" Parker as someone who is unwlling to support the club long term - notice he offered him the chair, said he'd done all he could etc.

Now maybe I'm being cynical.
I've been rather thinking long and hard about whether Fenty is simply putting the clubs best long term interests at heart.
Maybe he is but I'm not convinced when we're apparently near skint and the season has barely started !

As for Parker, would you make a commitment to support the club with the current board ?!
Notice Parker hasn't said "I won't be", only that he's making no guarantee at the present time.

Quoted from gtfc98

The way I see it Fenty is looking for an exit strategy. He thought he could use Parkers controlling holding as a reason and force Parker into take control of the club. It hasn't work, he hasn't been able to force his hand and as a result we have a situation where neither of our benefactors appear to be willing to further finance the club.

WITHOUT BEING IN CHARGE ?

Quoted from forza ivano

therefore if fenty were to buy 500,000 of shares the total number becomes 2,140,00 of which he owns 1,000,000 so becoming the biggest shareholder, but still not at the threshold where he would need to offer to buy out all the other shareholders.
course what we'd need to know is how many more unissued shares there are for purchase and who is the 3rd biggest shareholder and would they then hold the balance of power?

See what you're saying.

Way I see it is, either Parker and Fenty want control or they don't.

If Parker does, then for any shares that Fenty puts it, Parker may try to do the same claiming it's to support the club in the short term ?
Personally I can't see JF participating in a "bidding war" in the current climate where finances are apparently tighter than a nuns private parts.

If Parker doesn't then you would be right - Fenty could choose to buy shares so shareholder control sat within the board room.

Trouble is, that doesn't stop the potential problem of Parker not being willing to invest his money long-term whilst Fenty or others are on the board (or whilst he could potentially be if that's his issue).

Quoted from GollyGTFC

As he well knows Parker could call an EGM at any time he chooses and get rid of the entire board and bring his own people in.

If that's true then why hasn't he done so (yet) ?
Because he wants Fenty to carry on ?
But then why would he resign from the board and be unwilling to return ?

Arrghghghghhhh !