New Chairman?

Quoted from Garth

Oh dear! its a bit like bites the hand thats fed them

Is someone gonna reimburse the fans ticket money for the last 7 years?

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

Whatever reflects off Parker it will be very difficult for him to be held in a worse light than John and his disastrous reign of the last 7 years nothing but a catalouge of failure on and off the pitch that has culminated in this latest farcial stand off.Good riddance.

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

fenty (con) asked for investmentbut appears you cannot have a say if you do invest,ill be keeping my tenner

Quoted from GollyGTFC

Fenty has already promised to quit the board if it drags on to the AGM after all, so why on earth would Parker want to force him out himself and be made to look the bad guy?

Has he promised ?!!  

Fenty said:
"If this issue is not resolved prior to the AGM on the 24th of November, then shareholders will be asked how they would like the Board to proceed. If the matter is not resolved by this date, Mr Fenty will most likely stand down from being a director joining the ranks with other shareholders at the meeting."

Quoted from GollyGTFC

George Kerr actually said something very inciteful on Tuesday's sport report programme. He realised and pointed out that Mike Parker is a very shrewd operator. He (Parker) basically challenged Fenty to match his shareholding to sort out the issue of him owning more shares knowing full well that Fenty wouldn't do it because it wouldn't alter the real issue for Fenty- that he has no overall control of the club and no way of regaining it.

Is "no overall control" the issue ?
Parker isn't in the boardroom and can't affect anything unless he's on the board or gains 75% support ?
I guess this is why Fenty might be worried about any increase in shareholding - not that he wasn't making the decisions because he clearly was and may still be if he returns.

Given sonik's comments it doesn't sound like Fenty is going to roll over.
So I wouldn't be too sure all these theories about EGMs are rubbish ?

Wouldn't suprise me if Parker was trying to assemble a new board right now but it's only guesswork...

Quoted from sonik

I wouldn't be so sure with MP holding all the aces folkes.  JF's sweated blood and tears for this club for many years as many know. Although not many on here give him any credit for this. John has always tried to do the right thing as to try make GTFC successful as it can be and for many years to come. Some will say look where we are and laugh but to for sure there are rocky times ahead and massive decisions to be made in the near future.  If John isn't a part of that I really fear for our club long term.  I and others hope this can be resolved behind the scenes but if Mike won't commit one way or the other or say what agenda he has this will all come out in public and maybe not reflect well with regard some of the aces people think Mike has.

UTM!!

  

Firstly thank you for joining the debate and giving a reasoned view.  It's obvious that either there has been a massive misunderstanding over the funding and how they would do it, ie shares / loans or one of them is lying.  I hope it's the misunderstanding option and it's quickly sorted.  

Allowing MP to have more shares is down to him and the board so how can he say the position is untenable when he allowed it in the first place.

The whole thing stinks and JF is the one who is losing face and credibility.  

He may have stopped the club going into administration when he first became Chairman but he could be one of the main reasons the club ceases to exist.  Some legacy.

Quoted from Marinerz93

Firstly thank you for joining the debate and giving a reasoned view.  It's obvious that either there has been a massive misunderstanding over the funding and how they would do it, ie shares / loans or one of them is lying.  I hope it's the misunderstanding option and it's quickly sorted.  

Allowing MP to have more shares is down to him and the board so how can he say the position is untenable when he allowed it in the first place.

The whole thing stinks and JF is the one who is losing face and credibility.  

He may have stopped the club going into administration when he first became Chairman but he could be one of the main reasons the club ceases to exist.  Some legacy.

If you were in John's position would'nt you want some clarity on things going forward as to where the majority shareholder sits from the outside.  That is all John is asking. You would'nt put more funds in to someone elses business only to be ousted at a later date when things turn for the better or worse for that matter.  Lets be fair about it!

Quoted from sonik

If you were in John's position would'nt you want some clarity on things going forward as to where the majority shareholder sits from the outside.  That is all John is asking. You would'nt put more funds in to someone elses business only to be ousted at a later date when things turn for the better or worse for that matter.  Lets be fair about it!

Sonik, I appreciate that you're going to defend your brother, I think most would... But i'm sure if he wasn't your brother, then you too would have some serious doubts about JF and how this has all happened...

I'm not saying MP is innocent in all of this but I certainly agree with M93, JF is coming out of this looking worse in my opinion... I mean what is the deal with releasing private e-mails, surely even you can't defend that course of action can you...???

sonik,

If John was so concerned over "majority shareholding laying outside the board", then why didn't he raise the issue when Parker left the board ?

He admits 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."

Reading HIS OWN statement:

"Assuming I acquired the same number of shares which was never discussed, control would still remain outside of the board room. Mr Parker suggested in the interview that I could equate, this does not solve the problem."

Why has it taken 6 months ?!!

Quoted from sonik

If you were in John's position would'nt you want some clarity on things going forward as to where the majority shareholder sits from the outside.  That is all John is asking. You would'nt put more funds in to someone elses business only to be ousted at a later date when things turn for the better or worse for that matter.  Lets be fair about it!

The issue is that John's resignation and untenable situation rests on the shares that he and the board allowed Mike Parker to buy.  I am being as fair as the facts are laid bare, he allowed himself and continues to allow himself to have less shares than MP.  This whole affair could be put to bed once and for all if John was to convert his benign loans into shares.  John for all his hard work and love for the club is turning himself into the Sword of Damocles that hangs over this club.

If there was a meeting to discuss funding and the like were are the minutes to help solve this fiasco.

Quoted from 1600

sonik,

If John was so concerned over "majority shareholding laying outside the board", then why didn't he raise the issue when Parker left the board ?

He admits 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."

Reading HIS OWN statement:

"Assuming I acquired the same number of shares which was never discussed, control would still remain outside of the board room. Mr Parker suggested in the interview that I could equate, this does not solve the problem."

Why has it taken 6 months ?!!

Perhaps trust and in this together stood for something then. That's my guess and not fact!